美国公民自由联盟对Aon人工智能招聘工具发起投诉美国公民自由联盟（ACLU）于2024年6月6日向美国联邦贸易委员会提交了针对Aon的投诉，挑战其候选人评估工具的合法性和偏见问题。ACLU指控Aon的评估工具，如Adept-15人格测试和vidAssess-AI视频评估工具，在市场上虚假宣称“无偏见”并能“增进多样性”，实际上这些工具可能基于种族和残疾（如自闭症和心理健康障碍）歧视求职者。此外，ACLU还提到，Aon的gridChallenge认知能力评估也显示出种族表现上的差异。针对这些指控，Aon回应称其评估工具遵循行业最佳实践和EEOC、法律及专业指导原则。ACLU此举揭示了在职场包容性与合规性之间的紧张关系，呼吁更严格审查这些广泛使用的人力资源技术工具。
在人力资源技术迅速发展的世界中，人工智能（AI）扮演着关键角色，承诺将简化流程并增强招聘实践的效率。然而，AI整合到这些实践中经常引发关于公平性和歧视的重大争议。最近的一个例子涉及到全球专业服务公司Aon，该公司的AI驱动的招聘评估工具因美国公民自由联盟（ACLU）的指控而受到审查。ACLU向美国联邦贸易委员会（FTC）正式投诉Aon，突显了关于AI在招聘中应用的重要对话。
ACLU投诉的基础
ACLU指控Aon欺骗性地营销其招聘评估工具——特别是Adept-15性格评估、vidAssess-AI视频面试工具和gridChallenge认知能力测试——这些工具被宣称为无偏见并有助于提高工作场所的多样性。根据ACLU的说法，这些声明不仅具有误导性，而且可能违法，因为这些工具可能会基于种族和残疾（如自闭症、抑郁症和焦虑症）歧视求职者。这些工具使用算法和AI进行评估，根据候选人的积极性、情感意识和活力等特征进行评估，这些特征往往与工作表现无直接关联，且可能对某些残疾人群产生不成比例的影响。
Aon的辩护和行业实践
面对ACLU的指控，Aon为其产品辩护，声称这些工具是根据法律和专业指南（包括平等就业机会委员会EEOC设定的指南）设计的。Aon强调他们的工具是雇主用于做出更具包容性招聘决策的更广泛评估工具集的一部分。此外，Aon还指出其工具的效率和成本效益，认为这些工具比传统方法更少歧视性。
法律和道德含义
这场争议引发了关于使用AI进行就业的重要法律和道德问题。美国的法律，包括美国残疾人法案（ADA）和民权法案第七章，要求就业中的非歧视实践，涵盖从招聘到工作场所的所有方面。ACLU向FTC的投诉不仅提示可能违反这些法律，还将问题框定为不仅是就业歧视，还涉及消费者欺诈的问题。
更广泛的行业关注
ACLU对Aon的行动是更广泛运动的一部分，旨在审查用于招聘的AI工具。批评者认为，虽然这些技术提供了无偏见决策的潜力，但它们常常缺乏透明度，并可能无意中编码了其开发者或它们所训练的数据集的偏见。这一问题由于这些工具的专有性质而变得更加复杂，这阻碍了对它们的公平性和效率进行彻底的公众评估。
潜在后果和改革
ACLU对Aon的投诸可能对人力资源技术行业产生深远影响。如果FTC决定调查或制裁Aon，可能会导致对AI在招聘中的使用进行更严格的监管，可能为整个行业中类似工具的市场营销和实施设定先例。对依赖这些工具的公司而言，此案可能是重新评估其算法以确保符合反歧视法律的关键提示。
此外，此案凸显了技术专家、法律专家、政策制定者和民权倡导者之间需要进行持续对话的需求，以确保AI的进步能够增强而非破坏工作场所的平等。随着AI继续渗透到各种人力资源方面，制定维护反歧视和坚持道德原则的标准和最佳实践将至关重要。
结论
ACLU对Aon的投诉提醒我们在AI时代，创新、监管和权利之间的复杂相互作用。虽然AI为HR提供了变革的潜力，但它也需要谨慎处理以防止新形式的歧视。这个案例可能会成为AI在招聘伦理辩论中的一个里程碑，促使所有利益相关者考虑其技术选择的更广泛影响。随着法律程序的展开，人力资源技术行业将密切关注，意识到AI在招聘中的未来现在受到更审慎的公众和法律审视。
Unveiling Bias: The Controversy Over Aon's AI Hiring Tools and the ACLU's Challenge
In the rapidly evolving world of human resources technology, artificial intelligence (AI) plays a pivotal role, promising to streamline processes and enhance the efficiency of hiring practices. However, the integration of AI into these practices often sparks significant debate regarding fairness and discrimination. A recent example of this controversy involves Aon, a global professional services firm, whose AI-driven hiring assessment tools have come under scrutiny by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The ACLU's allegations against Aon, leading to a formal complaint to the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC), underline a critical dialogue about the implications of AI in hiring.
The Basis of the ACLU’s Complaint
The ACLU has accused Aon of deceptively marketing its hiring assessment tools — specifically the Adept-15 personality assessment, the vidAssess-AI video interviewing tool, and the gridChallenge cognitive ability test — as bias-free and conducive to improving diversity in the workplace. According to the ACLU, these claims are not only misleading but also potentially unlawful, as the tools may perpetuate discrimination against job seekers based on race and disabilities such as autism, depression, and anxiety. These tools, which utilize algorithmic processes and AI, are said to evaluate candidates on traits like positivity, emotional awareness, and liveliness, which are often not directly relevant to job performance and may disproportionately affect individuals with certain disabilities.
Aon’s Defense and Industry Practices
In response to the ACLU's claims, Aon has defended its products by asserting that they are designed in compliance with legal and professional guidelines, including those set forth by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). Aon emphasizes that their tools are part of a broader array of assessments used by employers to make more inclusive hiring decisions. Moreover, Aon points to the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of their tools, arguing that they are less discriminatory than traditional methods.
Legal and Ethical Implications
The controversy raises significant legal and ethical questions about the use of AI in employment. U.S. laws, including the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, mandate non-discriminatory practices in employment, covering all aspects from hiring to workplace accommodation. The ACLU's complaint to the FTC, an agency tasked with protecting America’s consumers and competition, suggests potential violations of these laws, framing the issue not only as one of employment discrimination but also of consumer deception.
Broader Industry Concerns
The ACLU's actions against Aon are part of a larger movement to scrutinize AI tools used for hiring. Critics argue that while these technologies offer the potential for unbiased decision-making, they often lack transparency and can inadvertently encode the biases of their developers or the data sets they are trained on. This issue is compounded by the proprietary nature of these tools, which prevents a thorough public assessment of their fairness and effectiveness.
Potential Repercussions and Reforms
The outcome of the ACLU’s complaint could have far-reaching implications for the HR technology industry. A decision by the FTC to investigate or sanction Aon could lead to more stringent regulations governing the development and use of AI in hiring, potentially setting a precedent for how similar tools are marketed and implemented across the industry. For companies that rely on these tools, the case may serve as a critical prompt to reevaluate their algorithms to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination laws.
Moreover, this case highlights the need for ongoing dialogue between technologists, legal experts, policymakers, and civil rights advocates to ensure that advancements in AI serve to enhance, rather than undermine, workplace equality. As AI continues to permeate various aspects of human resources, the development of standards and best practices that safeguard against discrimination and uphold ethical principles will be crucial.
Conclusion
The ACLU's complaint against Aon is a reminder of the complex interplay between innovation, regulation, and rights in the age of AI. While AI offers transformative potentials for HR, it also demands a cautious approach to prevent new forms of discrimination. This case may well become a landmark in the ongoing debate over AI ethics in hiring, urging all stakeholders to consider the broader implications of their technological choices. As the legal proceedings unfold, the HR technology industry will be watching closely, aware that the future of AI in hiring is now under a more discerning public and legal microscope.
头条
2024年06月06日
头条
参会必读：北美华人人力资源夏季论坛日程及会议注意事项
各位参会嘉宾，非常欢迎参加NACSHR北美华人人力资源夏季论坛！
为营造良好的会议氛围，帮助大家尽快熟悉会议安排以及会议相关行政事宜，特别分享论坛相关注意事项如下，烦请了解和熟悉！
2024北美华人人力资源夏季论坛
会议时间：2024年6月8日-9日 周六周日 （9:00-17:00）
签到时间：6月8日 周六8点半开始签到
会议地点：Sonesta Silicon Valley 1820 Barber Lane Milpitas, CA 95035 （停车可以直接绕道会议中心后面停车场，后面附录地图）
赞助合作伙伴：言信律师事务所介绍 中国南方航空
会议日程安排：
可以点击这里的链接或直接访问图片：DAY1 DAY2
会议午餐：自理 活动期间会组成不同小组，可结伴前往，临近 Milpitas Square 华人餐厅聚集。
会议提问：可以点击这个链接提前输入自己的问题 http://hrday.com/survey/survey.php?id=50C568AA-5E95-CC19-714E-CD2BD7FE9AB3
参会其他注意事项 （更详尽事宜参考文章尾部英文）：
视频和摄影 参加 NACSHR 即表示您同意由官方展会摄影师和摄像师拍摄您的形象。由此产生的材料，包括静态照片、视频和音频记录，NACSHV 可以在新闻材料、宣传材料、网站和其他宣传渠道中不受限制地使用。与会嘉宾可以使用智能手机拍照和捕捉数字图像，仅限于个人、非商业用途，且摄影活动不得造成干扰。在会议进行时，与会嘉宾可以在座位上拍照，条件是不得站在媒体区域、阻挡其他人视线或使用闪光灯。照片不得以任何方式出售、复制、传播、分发或用于任何商业目的。
直播和录制会议 虽然 NACSHR 会录制和拍摄各种会议活动，这些活动主要是为了现场观众的利益。尽管我们实行“禁止直播和录制”的政策，但我们理解与会者希望通过手机捕捉照片和视频，并在社交网络上分享的愿望。为了保护发言者和会议内容的版权，与会嘉宾不得直播会议，并且同意录制任何单场会议的连续视频不得超过 60 秒。
会议会场安全事宜：
会场外景和地图
NACSHR Forum Attendee Guidelines
1. Safety and Emergency Procedures
Emergency Exits and Safety Routes: Locate emergency exits and familiarize yourself with the nearest safety routes upon arrival.
Emergency Response: Remain calm and follow the directions of staff in case of an emergency.
Health Safety: Adhere to all health and safety guidelines set by the venue, including the use of masks and sanitizers as required.
2. Registration and Identification
Pre-registration: Ensure smooth entry by completing online registration and identity verification in advance.
Badge Display: Wear your conference badge at all times for access and visibility during the event.
3. Code of Conduct
Respect and Professionalism: Maintain respect for all participants, speakers, and staff. Harassment, discrimination, or inappropriate behavior will result in expulsion from the venue.
Intellectual Property: Respect intellectual property rights; do not record or disseminate presentation content or materials without permission.
Cyber Security: Exercise caution when using venue Wi-Fi, especially when accessing sensitive or critical information.
4. Photography and Recording
Personal Use: Non-commercial photography and video recording should not disrupt the event or other attendees’ experience.
No Live Broadcasting: Live broadcasting of any session is prohibited without explicit permission from the organizers.
5. Facility Use
Cleanliness: Keep the venue clean; dispose of trash in designated receptacles.
Equipment Care: Use conference facilities and equipment responsibly; damages may be subject to compensation.
6. Communication and Networking
Engagement: Participate actively in discussions and networking opportunities to enhance your professional connections.
Cultural Sensitivity: With diverse backgrounds among attendees, display cultural sensitivity and inclusiveness.
7. Intellectual Property and Confidentiality
Confidentiality Obligations: Confidential information and unpublished data discussed at the forum must not be disclosed without authorization.
Material Distribution: Conference materials are for session use only and should not be copied or distributed without consent.
8. Legal Compliance and Ethical Standards
Local Laws: Comply with all applicable local laws, including antitrust laws and fair competition.
Ethical Behavior: Encourage high standards of professional ethics, characterized by honesty, fairness, and responsibility.
9. Anti-Harassment Policy
Harassment-Free Environment: Commit to a harassment-free environment; all complaints will be taken seriously to ensure the rights and privacy of victims.
10. Complaints and Feedback Mechanism
Feedback Channels: Establish clear channels for complaints and feedback during and post-event.
Rapid Response Team: Have a rapid response team available during the event to handle any emergencies or urgent needs from attendees.
11. Property Security
Personal Belongings: Attendees are advised to keep personal belongings secure as the organizers are not liable for loss or damage.
Facility Equipment: Unauthorized use or relocation of venue facilities and equipment is prohibited.
12. Prohibition of Political and Religious Advocacy
Neutral Policy: The forum is a platform for professional and business exchanges; any form of political or religious advocacy is prohibited.
头条
2024年05月31日
头条
美国一家IT人力资源公司因招聘信息中注明“仅限当地社区白人”申请，被求职者投诉种族歧视，被罚款概览：2023年3月，Arthur Grand Technologies发布了一则仅限“美国出生的白人公民”申请的招聘广告。经调查，这是一名心怀不满的员工报复公司的行为。公司总部位于弗吉尼亚州阿什本，是一家小型弱势企业。美国司法部和劳工部认定公司违反了相关法律，处以7500美元罚款，并向31名应聘者支付共计3.1万美元的赔偿金。公司否认批准广告，并称其为员工个人行为，已立即解雇该员工。首席执行官重申对多样性的承诺，并采取措施防止类似事件再发生。
本周，美国司法部和劳工部经调查后，对该公司处以7500美元的民事罚款，并命令其向31位应聘该职位的人，每人支付1000美元，总计3.1万美元的赔偿金。
经过调查，这起招聘启示的发布，竟然是该公司一位员工为了报复公司所为。
背景
2023年3月，Arthur Grand Technologies Inc.发布了一则招聘广告，明确要求“只有美国出生的公民(白人)”和居住在德州达拉斯60英里以内的人，才能申请“Salesforce业务分析师和保险理赔职位”。此外，招聘启事中还规定，求职者不得与其他候选人分享信息。
本周二（2024年5月28日），Arthur Grand Technologies Inc.与美国政府部门达成和解协议。根据协议，该公司将支付7500美元的民事罚款，并赔偿每位应聘者1000美元，总计3.1万美元。
公司背景
Arthur Grand Technologies Inc.是一家总部位于弗吉尼亚州阿什本的IT人力资源公司。公司的注册地址是一个两层楼的办公大楼，距离杜勒斯国际机场约10英里。根据美国政府的记录，该公司被认证为联邦承包商名录中的一家“小型弱势企业”。要获得这种资格，公司的大部分所有权必须归“一名或多名弱势人士”所有，这些人必须在社会和经济上处于弱势地位。
员工行为
司法部称，Arthur Grand Technologies Inc.否认公司批准了这条招聘信息，并称该信息是由一位“心怀不满的印度招聘人员”所发布，目的是让公司陷入麻烦。据悉，这位员工因处于绩效改进计划（PIP）中不满，于是为了报复公司，通过其个人电子邮件地址和账户发布了这则招聘。
法律依据
美国司法部认定，该公司违反了《移民和国籍法》，因为其发布了“只要求在美国出生的求职者”的招聘信息，非法地阻止了在美国境外出生的美国公民以及某些有资格工作的非公民申请岗位。与此同时，美国劳工部表示，经调查该公司违反了第11246号行政命令，该命令禁止联邦承包商在就业方面基于种族、肤色、宗教、性别、性取向、性别认同或国籍进行歧视。
司法部声明
司法部民权司助理司法部长Kristen Clarke宣布达成和解协议时表示：“在21世纪，我们仍然看到雇主使用‘仅限白人’和‘仅限美国出生’的招聘启事，排除其他符合条件的有色人种候选人，这是可耻的。司法部将与其他政府机构合作，继续追究雇主违反我国联邦民权法的责任。”
公司回应
Arthur Grand Technologies Inc.的首席执行官Sheik Rahmathullah表示，公司没有承认任何罪行或不法行为，同意司法部和劳工部协议，只是为了避免诉讼给公司带来的重大财务损失和长期业务中断。
Rahmathullah解释道：“这些协议不应被解释为公司承认有罪或有不当行为。引发舆论的招聘启事是‘未经授权发布的’。我们为公司所有高级领导职位都由有色人种担任，并且超过80%的员工是有色人种而感到自豪。”
他补充说道：“我们立刻采取了果断措施，确保这种事情不再发生，包括立即解雇负责的员工。对于此次事件造成的任何伤害，我们深表歉意，并承诺做出有意义的改变，以恢复我们社区和利益相关者的信任和信心。”
言信律师事务所介绍——NACSHR夏季论坛赞助合作伙伴言信律师事务所 介绍：
美国言信律师事务所位于世界中心曼哈顿， 是一个精耕美国移民案子的律师事务所。我们代理过的客户从上市公司、小型初创企业到个人，我们的目标是致力于为申请人提供最新、最合适的移民策略。
THE LAW FIRM OF ATTORNEY PENG
我们的行业经验
彭律师事务所自成立以来专注于美国移民法业务。 作为新移民的生活引领者，精心办理EB-1、EB-5、O1、L-1、以及职业移民等各类移民案件。 此外，他们还为客户提供一系列移民项目。 通过投资、创业、科技、艺术等多元化移民路线，为数以万计的家庭和个人架起通往美国的桥梁。
我们对结果的承诺
创始人彭律师不仅拥有10多年办理美国移民的经验，而且擅长办理疑难案件。 入管局有很多主观判断因素。 彭律师拥有充足的过往申请案例，对各种被移民局拒绝的“疑难杂症”有深入的研究，从而准确评估申请人，通过上诉让申请起死回生。
我们的理念
彭律师事务所为申请人提供了诚信、专业、高效、满意的服务，得到了广大客户的高度认可。 但我们深知，客户的每一次移民都是对整个家庭和未来的重大计划和改变。 因此，每个项目提交前，团队都会对申请人进行全面评估，并对项目的法律文件进行严格审核，让移民变得安全、高效。
我们的经验
当案件涉及不同领域的法律时，我们将与相应领域的专业团队合作，提供赢得案件的关键行业资源，设计稳定的解决方案，确保客户在案件申请过程中得到有效的支持。
官方网站：https://www.thepenglaw.com/
头条
2024年05月22日
头条
加州最高法院倾向支持第22号提案：零工工人或继续作为独立承包商加州最高法院似乎对否决选民对第 22 号提案的意见犹豫不决，该提案是一项允许共享单车公司将司机归类为独立承包商的投票倡议。大法官们在口头辩论中的提问方式表明，可能会寻求妥协，而不是完全宣布该法律无效。2020 年，58% 的选民通过了第 22 号提案，但该提案一直面临着法律挑战，其命运可能会对加州临时工的分类和福利产生重大影响。
The California Supreme Court appears hesitant to overrule voters on Proposition 22, a ballot initiative allowing ride-share companies to classify drivers as independent contractors. The justices' line of questioning during oral arguments suggested a compromise might be sought, rather than fully invalidating the law. Proposition 22, passed by 58% of voters in 2020, has faced ongoing legal challenges and its fate could significantly impact gig workers' classification and benefits in California.
加州最高法院在审理第22号提案（Prop. 22）时显得犹豫，似乎不愿推翻这项由选民在2020年通过的提案。第22号提案允许网约车公司如优步和Lyft将司机归类为独立承包商，而不是雇员。这项提案自成为法律以来，一直面临法律挑战，包括被一名高等法院法官裁定违宪，随后又被上诉法院维持原判。现在，加州最高法院正在审理这项提案是否与州议会执行完整工人赔偿系统的宪法权力相冲突。
在听取口头辩论时，法官们的提问表明，他们可能在寻求一种折中方案，而不是完全废除这项法律。首席大法官帕特里夏·格雷罗问到，议员是否可以恢复零工工人的工人赔偿，而副大法官古德温·刘则指出，选民提案的权力是否等同于立法权力，是否意味着选民在工人赔偿领域完全无权行动。
代表SEIU加州和四名零工工人的律师斯科特·克朗兰德强调，第22号提案与议会的无限权力相冲突。而代表零工公司的律师杰弗里·费舍尔则认为，宪法允许选民对任何主题采取行动，甚至可以通过提案取消工人赔偿，但他认为这距离实际情况还很远。
零工工人团体的一些成员在法庭外举行了集会，呼吁支持零工工人的权益。提案的支持者如贝区司机科拉·曼达帕特则表示，她依赖于提案中的一些规定，比如保证最低工资120%的收入，而反对者如埃德·卡拉斯科则认为法官们似乎在寻找修改提案的方法，以便让零工工人可以在某些情况下获得工人赔偿。
最高法院的七位法官将在90天内作出决定，这一决定可能会改变加州的零工经济。如果第22号提案被推翻，零工公司将受到2019年通过的第5号法案（Assembly Bill 5）的约束，这可能会要求公司为他们的140万名工人支付雇佣税，并提供额外的福利，如病假工资和超时工资。
反对第22号提案的人指出，零工工人的薪酬和福利仍然存在问题。加州大学伯克利分校劳工中心的一项研究显示，扣除费用后，网约车司机的平均时薪为7.12美元，而送货工人为5.93美元。包括小费在内，司机的平均时薪为9.09美元，送货工人为13.62美元。
这一裁决不仅会影响加州，还可能对其他地方的相关立法和条例产生影响。例如，最近在明尼苏达州，立法者通过了一项法案，设定了网约车司机的最低工资标准，而这些公司威胁要退出该州。
头条
2024年05月22日
头条
美国劳工部发布职场人工智能使用原则，保护员工权益（附录原文）
今天5月16日，美国劳工部发布了一套针对人工智能（AI）在职场使用的原则，旨在为雇主提供指导，确保人工智能技术的开发和使用以员工为核心，提升所有员工的工作质量和生活质量。代理劳工部长朱莉·苏在声明中指出：“员工必须是我们国家AI技术发展和使用方法的核心。这些原则反映了拜登-哈里斯政府的信念，人工智能不仅要遵守现有法律，还要提升所有员工的工作和生活质量。”
根据劳工部发布的内容，这些AI原则包括：
以员工赋权为中心：员工及其代表，特别是来自弱势群体的代表，应被告知并有真正的发言权参与AI系统的设计、开发、测试、培训、使用和监督。这确保了AI技术在整个生命周期中考虑到员工的需求和反馈。
道德开发AI：AI系统应以保护员工为目标设计、开发和培训。这意味着在开发AI时，需要优先考虑员工的安全、健康和福祉，防止技术对员工造成不利影响。
建立AI治理和人工监督：组织应有明确的治理体系、程序、人工监督和评估流程，确保AI系统在职场中的使用符合伦理规范，并有适当的监督机制来防止误用。
确保AI使用的透明度：雇主应对员工和求职者透明地展示其使用的AI系统。这包括向员工说明AI系统的功能、目的以及其在工作中的具体应用，增强员工的信任感。
保护劳动和就业权利：AI系统不应违反或破坏员工的组织权、健康和安全权、工资和工时权以及反歧视和反报复保护。这确保了员工在AI技术的应用下，其基本劳动权益不受侵害。
使用AI来支持员工：AI系统应协助、补充和支持员工，并改善工作质量。这意味着AI应被用来提升员工的工作效率和舒适度，而不是取代员工或增加其工作负担。
支持受AI影响的员工：雇主应在与AI相关的工作转换期间支持或提升员工的技能。这包括提供培训和职业发展机会，帮助员工适应新的工作环境和技术要求。
确保负责任地使用员工数据：AI系统收集、使用或创建的员工数据应限于合法商业目的，并被负责地保护和处理。这确保了员工数据的隐私和安全，防止数据滥用。
这些原则是根据拜登总统发布的《安全、可靠和可信赖的人工智能开发和使用行政命令》制定的，旨在为开发者和雇主提供路线图，确保员工在AI技术带来的新机遇中受益，同时避免潜在的危害。
拜登政府强调，这些原则不仅适用于特定行业，而是应在各个领域广泛应用。原则不是详尽的列表，而是一个指导框架，供企业根据自身情况进行定制，并在员工参与下实施最佳实践。通过这种方式，拜登政府希望能在确保AI技术推动创新和机会的同时，保护员工的权益，避免技术可能带来的负面影响。
这套原则发布后，您认为它会对贵公司的AI技术使用和员工权益保护产生怎样的影响？
英文如下：
Department of Labor's Artificial Intelligence and Worker Well-being: Principles for Developers and Employers
Since taking office, President Biden, Vice President Harris, and the entire Biden-Harris Administration have moved with urgency to harness AI's potential to spur innovation, advance opportunity, and transform the nature of many jobs and industries, while also protecting workers from the risk that they might not share in these gains. As part of this commitment, the AI Executive Order directed the Department of Labor to create Principles for Developers and Employers when using AI in the workplace. These Principles will create a roadmap for developers and employers on how to harness AI technologies for their businesses while ensuring workers benefit from new opportunities created by AI and are protected from its potential harms.
The precise scope and nature of how AI will change the workplace remains uncertain. AI can positively augment work by replacing and automating repetitive tasks or assisting with routine decisions, which may reduce the burden on workers and allow them to better perform other responsibilities. Consequently, the introduction of AI-augmented work will create demand for workers to gain new skills and training to learn how to use AI in their day-to-day work. AI will also continue creating new jobs, including those focused on the development, deployment, and human oversight of AI. But AI-augmented work also poses risks if workers no longer have autonomy and direction over their work or their job quality declines. The risks of AI for workers are greater if it undermines workers' rights, embeds bias and discrimination in decision-making processes, or makes consequential workplace decisions without transparency, human oversight and review. There are also risks that workers will be displaced entirely from their jobs by AI.
In recent years, unions and employers have come together to collectively bargain new agreements setting sensible, worker-protective guardrails around the use of AI and automated systems in the workplace. In order to provide AI developers and employers across the country with a shared set of guidelines, the Department of Labor developed "Artificial Intelligence and Worker Well-being: Principles for Developers and Employers" as directed by President Biden's Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence, with input from workers, unions, researchers, academics, employers, and developers, among others, and through public listening sessions.
APPLYING THE PRINCIPLES
The following Principles apply to the development and deployment of AI systems in the workplace, and should be considered during the whole lifecycle of AI – from design to development, testing, training, deployment and use, oversight, and auditing. The Principles are applicable to all sectors and intended to be mutually reinforcing, though not all Principles will apply to the same extent in every industry or workplace. The Principles are not intended to be an exhaustive list but instead a guiding framework for businesses. AI developers and employers should review and customize the best practices based on their own context and with input from workers.
The Department's AI Principles for Developers and Employers include:
[North Star] Centering Worker Empowerment: Workers and their representatives, especially those from underserved communities, should be informed of and have genuine input in the design, development, testing, training, use, and oversight of AI systems for use in the workplace.
Ethically Developing AI: AI systems should be designed, developed, and trained in a way that protects workers.
Establishing AI Governance and Human Oversight: Organizations should have clear governance systems, procedures, human oversight, and evaluation processes for AI systems for use in the workplace.
Ensuring Transparency in AI Use: Employers should be transparent with workers and job seekers about the AI systems that are being used in the workplace.
Protecting Labor and Employment Rights: AI systems should not violate or undermine workers' right to organize, health and safety rights, wage and hour rights, and anti-discrimination and anti-retaliation protections.
Using AI to Enable Workers: AI systems should assist, complement, and enable workers, and improve job quality.
Supporting Workers Impacted by AI: Employers should support or upskill workers during job transitions related to AI.
Ensuring Responsible Use of Worker Data: Workers' data collected, used, or created by AI systems should be limited in scope and location, used only to support legitimate business aims, and protected and handled responsibly.
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
头条
扫一扫
添加客服
