As the Canadian government develops a strategy on how to use artificial intelligence (AI) in federal services, union president Sean O’Reilly says the feds are not adequately considering labour concerns.
The Liberal government introduced the plan to integrate AI into the public service during the most recent federal election. It moved forward in late August when the government partnered with Cohere, a Toronto tech company that focuses on integrating AI within large organizations.
AI Minister Evan Solomon celebrated this agreement as an important step towards a more efficient and effective public service.
But O’Reilly, who heads the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC) that represents more than 80,000 federal and provincial employees, including 20,000 information technology professionals, is not fully sold on Canada’s partnership with the private multinational.
“If we’re going to use an AI for the government of Canada, or if there’s AI [that’s] going to be developed for use by federal public servants, why is that not being built inside the government?” said O’Reilly. “We have the expertise, we have the knowledge.”
O’Reilly says he’s appealing for a more “in-house” project because he wants sensitive information and data to “be manipulated by Canadians … and not by private corporations.”
He also wants more more transparency through a public registry that tracks government use of AI – a measure that Ottawa has not yet acted on after promising it in September.
In addition to concerns over data privacy and transparency, unions question whether AI will impact the quality of service delivered to Canadians.
“At the end of the day, no one wants a machine to be making a decision on their tax return or … a benefit they’ve applied to,” said O’Reilly. “If you ask anybody, they would much rather have a human being taking care of that.”
Job vulnerability
There are many discussions and predictions around how AI could replace human workers or disrupt jobs around the world. Questions about job vulnerability have come to the capital given Ottawa’s large public service workforce, but some view the rise of AI in a more positive light.
“[The question is] how can we make a public servant better with the AI to better serve the Canadian public?”
Sean O’Reilly, President of PIPSC
Majid Komeili, a computer science professor at Carleton University, says some industries feared automation when it became more common in the 1970s.
“When robotics became popular in manufacturing, people were worried about losing jobs [and wondering] if it was going to be the end of factory jobs,” said Komeili.
But he says the opposite has proven true. Company investments in robotics led to further productivity and expansion, rather than contraction.
“Eventually they ended up hiring more people,” he said.
Komeili also says people might be more cautious of AI because past technologies mainly automated physical tasks, while AI “is automating thinking and reasoning.”
This makes the AI transformation unique from previous technological revolutions.
Industries impacted by physical automation in the past were able to provide education and reskilling, which involves teaching skills outside a person’s current work, Komeili says. That option would be less viable today since AI impacts employees with higher education.
Komeili says the fate of jobs exposed to AI, such as public service occupations, will depend on whether AI complements their work or makes it obsolete.
O’Reilly, an IT professional by trade, says he “absolutely” sees a potential positive relationship between employees and AI.
“It’s all about augmentation,” he said. “[The question is] how can we make a public servant better with the AI to better serve the Canadian public?”
At the end of September, the federal government began a month-long consultation with academics and business people that looked into the opportunities AI presents and how it can be adopted.
O’Reilly says he has met with Solomon, but his advocacy has not prompted much dialogue between his union and the federal government.
“It feels like we’re not being included when we actually have a lot of great ideas to help the government,” said O’Reilly. “We want to work and collaborate with them, but I don’t know if that appetite is there on the government side.”
O’Reilly says greater communication is the most important thing he wants to achieve.
“I want to be able to sit down with people that are talking about how we use AI,” he said. “Maybe part of that is about retraining [employees at risk of job loss], but we’re not even there yet.”
O’Reilly remains optimistic, though he says it has been difficult to stay this way “when we present ideas and we get nothing on the other side.”
In an email statement to Capital Current, Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat spokesperson Barbara Couperus wrote that “the AI Strategy for the Federal Public Service … was developed following extensive consultation with bargaining agents, academia, civil society, the public service, Indigenous communities and industry.
“Bargaining agents are also directly engaged as we develop responsible AI policy. Most recently, as part of the 4th review on the Directive on Automated Decision-Making, TBS met with bargaining agents on Dec. 12, 2024, to hear proposals and consult with them on the evolution of the policy instrument.
“Throughout the development and implementation of strategy and policy, we have remained committed to considering all feedback to ensure the strategy meets the needs of all Canadians and can evolve and adapt to meet future needs.”
