Job retention, creation, and insulation – will the Office of AI protect employees?

Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has taken the landmark step of creating a team of ministers to focus on AI’s impact on the country, with shrinking sectors and a dynamic labour market anticipated to be a focus of the office.

Further to the federal government’s announcement of a newly established Office of AI and national AI framework, experts are considering the potential implications on employment, which continues to modulate in response to AI.

According to Dr Eduardo Velloso, professor of computer science and deputy head of school at The University of Sydney, the announcement is a welcome development by way of the centralisation of national AI strategy, but it is difficult to know what this means for employment.

“The PM talked about building sovereign AI capability, but this will only create durable, high-value employment if it is matched with some serious investment,” he said, noting that Australia has, historically, underinvested in AI relative to other countries," he said.

Velloso added that anticipated regulatory standards “might drive investment away from Australia, which, combined with the recent capital gains tax reform, does not create an environment suitable for creating jobs”.

Dr Mary Lou Maher, of The University of Sydney’s faculty of engineering, offered similar sentiments, saying that the headline commitments were “a step in the right direction”, but require strong and actionable policy.

Success, she said, depends on what individuals will sit in the office, whether artists’ rights will be enforced in law, whether states agree to one national data centre framework, and whether tougher rules could push investment offshore.

While Maher noted that the PM’s assertion that companies must “earn the right” to build is reasonable, she further identified AI safety regulation and literacy as notable deficiencies in the announcement.

“Clear regulations and guidelines are needed to ensure people are not harmed by AI systems. AI literacy is essential for all citizens. Government should be running campaigns and funding incentives to build AI literacy into school and higher education, not treating it as an afterthought,” she said.

“Get the details right, and this becomes real policy, not just intent.”

According to Dr Rebecca Johnson, an expert in AI governance and evaluation from The University of Sydney and EthicsGenAI.com, the new office will be judged on whether it can deliver on the promise of creating good jobs rather than replacing them.

“Data centres may create construction and infrastructure jobs, but they do not, by themselves, create a durable national AI workforce. Australia needs to map the capabilities it will need, decide how to develop them, and build pathways into government, industry and research,” she said.

Johnson said a priority should be investment in generative and agentic AI researchers who currently “enter a thin local market dominated by short-term and casual contracts”, adding that they should be consulted in the design of the national framework and workforce strategy.

During his speech, Albanese proposed “the strongest copyright protections for Australian artists … to preserve the creativity that is fundamental to who we are, to our national identity and the journalism that is essential to our democratic society”.

Velloso explained that increased protections would, in theory, benefit creative industries, but noted they are difficult to implement.

In a similar vein, Dr Timothy Koskie of the faculty of arts and social sciences at The University of Sydney said that prospective job loss in the creative sector “isn’t being conducted by AI directly and is a continuation of decades of effort to condense workforces”.

He explained that the Office of AI may target content theft, but that this is only half the problem – with job cuts often being done by employers themselves in relation to declining revenue.

“Most recent increases to journalistic workforces have been in response to subsidies … not a result of new institutions having a strong year – revenue pressures on journalistic employment only seem capable of operating one way", Koskie said.

“Improving the conditions and number of media roles in Australia is likely to require an initiative that targets them directly.”

Similarly, Johnson explained that Australia must prepare its workforce with AI training that “allows them to assess where AI is useful, recognise its limits, and retain professional judgement”.

She said: “Employers, especially HR and workforce leaders, must learn to map capability needs and connect the right AI specialists with the people whose work is changing.”

Dr Kai Riemer, professor of information technology and organisation at The University of Sydney, told HR Leader that figuring out how best to bring AI technology to Australian society safely is crucial, but more important is the leadership and regulation behind it.

This perspective aligns with ongoing coverage concerning strong leadership as the determinative factor in the age of AI.

Riemer said: “A central office is necessary to coordinate efforts, but it is up to all leaders to make good decisions about AI. Coordination is a start, [and] upskilling is crucial.”

Velloso concurred, saying: “At the end of the day, it will all come down to the details of implementation. We need standards that are specific enough to be enforced, but flexible enough to keep pace with the evolution of the technology.”

While Australia waits for more details on the Office of AI and national AI framework, the standing committee on employment, workplace relations, skills and training continues its broader review of the National Employment Standards, in consideration of whether they are adequate given the changing nature of work.

Want to see more stories from trusted news sources?
Make HR Leader a preferred news source on Google.