AI and Job Quality

Insights from Frontline Workers

PAI Staff

Executive Summary

Based on an international study of on-the-job experiences with AI, this report draws from workers’ insights to point the way toward a better future for workplace AI. In addition to identifying common themes among workers’ stories, it provides guidance for key stakeholders who want to make a positive impact. These opportunities for impact can be downloaded individually as audience-specific summaries below.

Opportunities for impact for:

Across industries and around the world, AI is changing work. In the coming years, this rapidly advancing technology has the potential to fundamentally reshape humanity’s relationship with labor. As highlighted by previous Partnership on AI (PAI) research, however, the development and deployment of workplace AI often lacks input from an essential group of experts: the people who directly interact with these systems in their jobs.

Bringing the perspectives of workers into this conversation is both a moral and pragmatic imperative. Despite the direct impact of workplace AI on them, workers rarely have direct influence in AI’s creation or decisions about its implementation. This neglect raises clear concerns about unforeseen or overlooked negative impacts on workers. It also undermines the optimal use of AI from a corporate perspective.

This PAI report, based on an international study of on-the-job experiences with AI, seeks to address this gap. Through journals and interviews, workers in India, sub-Saharan Africa, and the United States shared their stories about workplace AI. From their reflections, PAI identified five common themes:

  1. Executive and managerial decisions shape AI’s impacts on workers, for better and worse. This starts with decisions about business models and operating models, continues through technology acquisitions and implementations, and finally manifests in direct impacts to workers.
  2. Workers have a genuine appreciation for some aspects of AI in their work and how it helps them in their jobs. Their spotlights here point the way to more mutually beneficial approaches to workplace AI.
  3. Workplace AI’s harms are not new or novel — they are repetitions or extensions of harms from earlier technologies and, as such, should be possible to anticipate, mitigate, and eliminate.
  4. Current implementations of AI often serve to reduce workers’ ability to exercise their human skills and talents. Skills like judgment, empathy, and creativity are heavily constrained in these implementations. To the extent that the future of AI is intended to increase humans’ ability to use these talents, the present of AI is sending many workers in the opposite direction.
  5. Empowering workers early in AI development and implementation increases the opportunities to attain the aforementioned benefits and avoid the harms. Workers’ deep experience in their own roles means they should be treated as subject-matter experts throughout the design and implementation process.

In addition, PAI drew from these themes to offer opportunities for impact for the major stakeholders in this space:

  1. AI-implementing companies, who can commit to AI deployments that do not decrease employee job quality.
  2. AI-creating companies, who can center worker well-being and participation in their values, practices, and product designs.
  3. Workers, unions, and worker organizers, who can work to influence and participate in decisions about technology purchases and implementations.
  4. Policymakers, who can shape the environments in which AI products are developed, sold, and implemented.
  5. Investors, who can account for the downside risks posed by practices harmful to workers and the potential value created by worker-friendly technologies.

The actions of each of these groups have the potential to both increase the prosperity enabled by AI technologies and share it more broadly. Together, we can steer AI in a direction that ensures it will benefit workers and society as a whole.

AI and Job Quality

Executive Summary

Introduction

The need for workers’ perspectives on workplace AI

The contributions of this report

Our Approach

Key research questions

Research methods

Site selection

Who we learned from

Participant recruitment

Major Themes and Findings

Theme 1: Executive and managerial decisions shape AI’s impacts on workers, for better and worse

Theme 2: Workers appreciate how some uses of AI have positively changed their jobs

Theme 3: Workplace AI harms repeat, continue, or intensify known possible harms from earlier technologies

Theme 4: Current implementations of AI in work are reducing workers’ opportunities for autonomy, judgment, empathy, and creativity

Theme 5: Empowering workers early in AI development and implementation increases opportunities to implement AI that benefits workers as well as their employers

Opportunities for Impact

Stakeholder 1: AI-implementing companies

Stakeholder Group 2: AI-creating companies

Stakeholder Group 3: Workers, unions, and worker organizers

Stakeholder Group 4: Policymakers

Stakeholder Group 5: Investors

Conclusion

Acknowledgements

Appendix 1: Detailed Site and Technology Descriptions

Appendix 2: Research Methods

Sources Cited

  1. Daniel Zhang et al., “The AI Index 2022 Annual Report” (AI Index Steering Committee, Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI, Stanford University, March 2022), https://aiindex.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2022-AI-Index-Report_Master.pdf.
  2. Michael Chui et al., “Global AI Survey 2021,” Survey (McKinsey u0026amp; Company, December 8, 2021), https://ceros.mckinsey.com/global-ai-survey-2020-a-desktop-3-1/p/1
  3. Jacques Bughin et al., “Artificial Intelligence: The Next Digital Frontier?,” Discussion Paper (McKinsey Global Institute, June 2017), https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/advanced%20electronics/our%20insights/how%20artificial%20intelligence%20can%20deliver%20real%20value%20to%20companies/mgi-artificial-intelligence-discussion-paper.ashx
  4. Partnership on AI, “Redesigning AI for Shared Prosperity: An Agenda” (Partnership on AI, May 2021), https://partnershiponai.org/paper/redesigning-ai-agenda/
  5. David Autor, David A. Mindell, and Elisabeth B. Reynolds, The Work of the Future: Building Better Jobs in an Age of Intelligent Machines (The MIT Press, 2022), https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/14109.001.0001
  6. Daniel Zhang et al., “The AI Index 2022 Annual Report” (AI Index Steering Committee, Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI, Stanford University, March 2022), https://aiindex.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2022-AI-Index-Report_Master.pdf
  7. Lant Pritchett, “The Future of Jobs Is Facing One, Maybe Two, of the Biggest Price Distortions Ever,” Middle East Development Journal 12, no. 1 (January 2, 2020): 131–56, https://doi.org/10.1080/17938120.2020.1714347
  8. James K. Harter, Frank L. Schmidt, and Theodore L. Hayes, “Business-Unit-Level Relationship between Employee Satisfaction, Employee Engagement, and Business Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis,” Journal of Applied Psychology 87, no. 2 (2002): 268–79, https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.87.2.268
  9. Kaoru Ishikawa, What Is Total Quality Control? The Japanese Way, trans. David John Lu (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1985)
  10. Gary P. Pisano, The Development Factory: Unlocking the Potential of Process Innovation (Harvard Business Press, 1997)
  11. Terje Slåtten and Mehmet Mehmetoglu, “Antecedents and Effects of Engaged Frontline Employees: A Study from the Hospitality Industry,” in New Perspectives in Employee Engagement in Human Resources (Emerald Group Publishing, 2015)
  12. Kayhan Tajeddini, Emma Martin, and Levent Altinay, “The Importance of Human-Related Factors on Service Innovation and Performance,” International Journal of Hospitality Management 85 (February 1, 2020): 102431, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102431
  13. Sergio Fernandez and David W. Pitts, “Understanding Employee Motivation to Innovate: Evidence from Front Line Employees in United States Federal Agencies,” Australian Journal of Public Administration 70, no. 2 (2011): 202–22, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8500.2011.00726.x
  14. Edward P. Lazear, “Compensation and Incentives in the Workplace,” Journal of Economic Perspectives 32, no. 3 (August 2018): 195–214, https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.32.3.195
  15. Joan Robinson, The Economics of Imperfect Competition (Springer, 1969)
  16. José Azar, Ioana Marinescu, and Marshall I. Steinbaum, “Labor Market Concentration,” Working Paper, Working Paper Series (National Bureau of Economic Research, December 2017), https://doi.org/10.3386/w24147
  17. Alan Manning, Monopsony in Motion: Imperfect Competition in Labor Markets, Monopsony in Motion (Princeton University Press, 2013), https://doi.org/10.1515/9781400850679
  18. Caitlin Lustig et al., “Algorithmic Authority: The Ethics, Politics, and Economics of Algorithms That Interpret, Decide, and Manage,” in Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI EA ’16 (New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2016), 1057–62, https://doi.org/10.1145/2851581.2886426
  19. Aiha Nguyen, “The Constant Boss: Work Under Digital Surveillance” (Data and Society, May 2021), https://datasociety.net/library/the-constant-boss/
  20. Matt Scherer, “Warning: Bossware May Be Hazardous to Your Health” (Center for Democracy u0026amp; Technology, July 2021), https://cdt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021-07-29-Warning-Bossware-May-Be-Hazardous-To-Your-Health-Final.pdf
  21. Mary L. Gray and Siddharth Suri, Ghost Work: How to Stop Silicon Valley from Building a New Global Underclass (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2019)
  22. Alexandra Mateescu and Aiha Nguyen, “Algorithmic Management in the Workplace,” Explainer (Data and Society, February 2019), https://datasociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/DS_Algorithmic_Management_Explainer.pdf
  23. Daniel Schneider and Kristen Harknett, “Schedule Instability and Unpredictability and Worker and Family Health and Wellbeing,” Working Paper (Washington Center for Equitable Growth, September 2016), http://cdn.equitablegrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/12135618/091216-WP-Schedule-instability-and-unpredictability.pdf
  24. V.B. Dubal. “Wage Slave or Entrepreneur?: Contesting the Dualism of Legal Worker Identities.” California Law Review 105, no. 1 (2017): 65–123, https://www.jstor.org/stable/24915689
  25. Ramiro Albrieu, ed., Cracking the Future of Work: Automation and Labor Platforms in the Global South, 2021, https://fowigs.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Cracking-the-future-of-work.-Automation-and-labor-platforms-in-the-Global-South-FOWIGS.pdf
  26. Phoebe V. Moore, “OSH and the Future of Work: Benefits and Risks of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Workplaces,” Discussion Paper (European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2019), https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/osh-and-future-work-benefits-and-risks-artificial-intelligence-tools-workplaces
  27. Frank Pasquale, The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information (Harvard University Press, 2015)
  28. Ifeoma Ajunwa, “The ‘Black Box’ at Work,” Big Data u0026amp; Society 7, no. 2 (July 1, 2020): 2053951720966181, https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951720938093
  29. Isabel Ebert, Isabelle Wildhaber, and Jeremias Adams-Prassl, “Big Data in the Workplace: Privacy Due Diligence as a Human Rights-Based Approach to Employee Privacy Protection,” Big Data u0026amp; Society 8, no. 1 (January 1, 2021): 20539517211013052, https://doi.org/10.1177/20539517211013051
  30. Andrea Dehlendorf and Ryan Gerety, “The Punitive Potential of AI,” in Redesigning AI, Boston Review (MIT Press, 2021), https://bostonreview.net/forum_response/the-punitive-potential-of-ai/
  31. Partnership on AI, “Framework for Promoting Workforce Well-Being in the AI-Integrated Workplace” (Partnership on AI, August 2020), https://partnershiponai.org/paper/workforce-wellbeing/
  32. Karen Hao, “Artificial Intelligence Is Creating a New Colonial World Order,” MIT Technology Review, accessed July 24, 2022, https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/04/19/1049592/artificial-intelligence-colonialism/
  33. Shakir Mohamed, Marie-Therese Png, and William Isaac, “Decolonial AI: Decolonial Theory as Sociotechnical Foresight in Artificial Intelligence,” Philosophy u0026amp; Technology 33 (December 1, 2020), https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-020-00405-8
  34. Aarathi Krishnan et al., “Decolonial AI Manyfesto,” https://manyfesto.ai/
  35. OECD.AI (2021), powered by EC/OECD (2021). “Database of National AI Policies.” https://oecd.ai/en/dashboards
  36. Kofi Yeboah, “Artificial Intelligence in Sub-Saharan Africa: Ensuring Inclusivity.” (Paradigm Initiative, December 2021), https://paradigmhq.org/report/artificial-intelligence-in-sub-saharan-africa-ensuring-inclusivity/
  37. Adapted from Qualtrics’ employee lifecycle model, “Employee Lifecycle: The 7 Stages Every Employer Must Understand and Improve,” Qualtrics, https://www.qualtrics.com/experience-management/employee/employee-lifecycle/
  38. Mayank Kumar Golpelwar, Global Call Center Employees in India: Work and Life between Globalization and Tradition (Springer, 2015)
  39. Hye Jin Rho, Shawn Fremstad, and Hayley Brown, “A Basic Demographic Profile of Workers in Frontline Industries” (Center for Economic and Policy Research, April 2020), https://cepr.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/2020-04-Frontline-Workers.pdf
  40. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. “All Employees, Warehousing and Storage.” FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. FRED, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, July 2022. https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/CES4349300001
  41. Lee Rainie et al., “AI and Human Enhancement: Americans’ Openness Is Tempered by a Range of Concerns” (Pew Research Center, March 2022), https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/wp-content/uploads/sites/9/2022/03/PS_2022.03.17_AI-HE_REPORT.pdf
  42. James Manyika et al., “Jobs Lost, Jobs Gained: What the Future of Work Will Mean for Jobs, Skills, and Wages” (McKinsey Global Institute, November 28, 2017), https://www.mckinsey.com/featured-insights/future-of-work/jobs-lost-jobs-gained-what-the-future-of-work-will-mean-for-jobs-skills-and-wages
  43. Mary L. Gray and Siddharth Suri, Ghost Work: How to Stop Silicon Valley from Building a New Global Underclass (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2019)
  44. International Labour Office. “Women and Men in the Informal Economy: A Statistical Picture (Third Edition).” International Labour Office, 2018. http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/u002du002d-dgreports/u002du002d-dcomm/documents/publication/wcms_626831.pdf
  45. International Labour Office. “Women and Men in the Informal Economy: A Statistical Picture (Third Edition).” International Labour Office, 2018. http://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/u002du002d-dgreports/u002du002d-dcomm/documents/publication/wcms_626831.pdf
  46. OECD, and International Labour Organization. “Tackling Vulnerability in the Informal Economy,” 2019. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/content/publication/939b7bcd-en
  47. James C. Scott, Seeing like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed, Yale Agrarian Studies (New Haven, Conn.: Yale Univ. Press, 2008)
  48. Reema Nanavaty, Expert interview with Reema Nanavaty, Director of Self Employed Women’s Association (SEWA), July 11, 2022
  49. Paul E. Spector, “Perceived Control by Employees: A Meta-Analysis of Studies Concerning Autonomy and Participation at Work,” Human Relations 39, no. 11 (November 1, 1986): 1005–16, https://doi.org/10.1177/001872678603901104
  50. Henry Ongori, “A Review of the Literature on Employee Turnover,” African Journal of Business Management 1, no. 3 (June 30, 2007): 049–054, https://academicjournals.org/article/article1380537420_Ongori.pdf
  51. See Virginia Doellgast and Sean O’Brady, “Making Call Center Jobs Better: The Relationship between Management Practices and Worker Stress,” June 1, 2020, https://ecommons.cornell.edu/handle/1813/74307 for additional detail and impacts of punitive managerial uses of monitoring technology in call centers, including increased worker stress
  52. Aiha Nguyen, “The Constant Boss: Work Under Digital Surveillance” (Data and Society, May 2021), https://datasociety.net/library/the-constant-boss/
  53. Matt Scherer, “Warning: Bossware May Be Hazardous to Your Health” (Center for Democracy u0026amp; Technology, July 2021), https://cdt.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/2021-07-29-Warning-Bossware-May-Be-Hazardous-To-Your-Health-Final.pdf
  54. Mary L. Gray and Siddharth Suri, Ghost Work: How to Stop Silicon Valley from Building a New Global Underclass (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2019)
  55. Alexandra Mateescu and Aiha Nguyen, “Algorithmic Management in the Workplace,” Explainer (Data and Society, February 2019), https://datasociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/DS_Algorithmic_Management_Explainer.pdf
  56. Andrea Dehlendorf and Ryan Gerety, “The Punitive Potential of AI,” in Redesigning AI, Boston Review (MIT Press, 2021), https://bostonreview.net/forum_response/the-punitive-potential-of-ai/
  57. Human Impact Partners and Warehouse Worker Resource Center, “The Public Health Crisis Hidden in Amazon Warehouses,” January 2021, https://humanimpact.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/The-Public-Health-Crisis-Hidden-In-Amazon-Warehouses-HIP-WWRC-01-21.pdf
  58. V.B. Dubal. “Wage Slave or Entrepreneur?: Contesting the Dualism of Legal Worker Identities.” California Law Review 105, no. 1 (2017): 65–123, https://www.jstor.org/stable/24915689
  59. Ramiro Albrieu, ed., Cracking the Future of Work: Automation and Labor Platforms in the Global South, 2021, https://fowigs.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Cracking-the-future-of-work.-Automation-and-labor-platforms-in-the-Global-South-FOWIGS.pdf
  60. Daniel Schneider and Kristen Harknett, “Schedule Instability and Unpredictability and Worker and Family Health and Wellbeing,” Working Paper (Washington Center for Equitable Growth, September 2016), http://cdn.equitablegrowth.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/12135618/091216-WP-Schedule-instability-and-unpredictability.pdf
  61. Arvind Narayanan, “How to Recognize AI Snake Oil,” https://www.cs.princeton.edu/~arvindn/talks/MIT-STS-AI-snakeoil.pdf
  62. Frederike Kaltheuner, ed., Fake AI (Meatspace Press, 2021), https://fakeaibook.com
  63. Aiha Nguyen, “The Constant Boss: Work Under Digital Surveillance” (Data and Society, May 2021), https://datasociety.net/library/the-constant-boss/
  64. Strategic Organizing Center, “Primed for Pain,” May 2021, https://thesoc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/PrimedForPain.pdf
  65. Alessandro Delfanti and Bronwyn Frey, “Humanly Extended Automation or the Future of Work Seen through Amazon Patents,” Science, Technology, u0026amp; Human Values 46, no. 3 (May 1, 2021): 655–82, https://doi.org/10.1177/0162243920943665
  66. Phoebe V. Moore, “OSH and the Future of Work: Benefits and Risks of Artificial Intelligence Tools in Workplaces,” Discussion Paper (European Agency for Safety and Health at Work, 2019), https://osha.europa.eu/en/publications/osh-and-future-work-benefits-and-risks-artificial-intelligence-tools-workplaces
  67. Strategic Organizing Center, “Primed for Pain,” May 2021, https://thesoc.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/PrimedForPain.pdf
  68. Annette Bernhardt, Lisa Kresge, and Reem Suleiman, “Data and Algorithms at Work: The Case for Worker” (UC Berkeley Labor Center, November 2021), https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Data-and-Algorithms-at-Work.pdf
  69. Andrea Dehlendorf and Ryan Gerety, “The Punitive Potential of AI,” in Redesigning AI, Boston Review (MIT Press, 2021), https://bostonreview.net/forum_response/the-punitive-potential-of-ai/
  70. Carl Benedikt Frey and Michael A. Osborne, “The Future of Employment: How Susceptible Are Jobs to Computerisation?,” Technological Forecasting and Social Change 114 (January 1, 2017): 254–80, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.08.019
  71. “These Are the Top 10 Job Skills of Tomorrow – and How Long It Takes to Learn Them,” World Economic Forum, https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/10/top-10-work-skills-of-tomorrow-how-long-it-takes-to-learn-them/
  72. Daniel Susskind, “Technological Unemployment,” in The Oxford Handbook of AI Governance, ed. Justin Bullock et al. (Oxford University Press), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197579329.013.42
  73. Christopher Mims, “Self-Driving Cars Could Be Decades Away, No Matter What Elon Musk Said,” WSJ, https://www.wsj.com/articles/self-driving-cars-could-be-decades-away-no-matter-what-elon-musk-said-11622865615
  74. Mary L. Gray and Siddharth Suri, Ghost Work: How to Stop Silicon Valley from Building a New Global Underclass (Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2019)
  75. Erik Brynjolfsson, “The Turing Trap: The Promise u0026amp; Peril of Human-Like Artificial Intelligence,” January 11, 2022, https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2201.04200
  76. World Economic Forum. “Positive AI Economic Futures.” Insight Report. World Economic Forum, November 2021. https://www.weforum.org/reports/positive-ai-economic-futures/
  77. Nithya Sambasivan and Rajesh Veeraraghavan, “The Deskilling of Domain Expertise in AI Development,” in Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, CHI ’22 (New York, NY, USA: Association for Computing Machinery, 2022), 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1145/3491102.3517578
  78. Sabrina Genz, Lutz Bellmann, and Britta Matthes, “Do German Works Councils Counter or Foster the Implementation of Digital Technologies?,” Jahrbücher Für Nationalökonomie Und Statistik 239, no. 3 (June 1, 2019): 523–64, https://doi.org/10.1515/jbnst-2017-0160
  79. Alan G. Robinson and Dean M. Schroeder, “The Role of Front-Line Ideas in Lean Performance Improvement,” Quality Management Journal 16, no. 4 (January 1, 2009): 27–40, https://doi.org/10.1080/10686967.2009.11918248
  80. Jeffrey K. Liker, The Toyota Way: 14 Management Principles From the World’s Greatest Manufacturer (McGraw Hill Professional, 2003)
  81. Taiichi Ohno, Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production (CRC Press, 1988)
  82. Kayhan Tajeddini, Emma Martin, and Levent Altinay, “The Importance of Human-Related Factors on Service Innovation and Performance,” International Journal of Hospitality Management 85 (February 1, 2020): 102431, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2019.102431
  83. Katherine C. Kellogg, Mark Sendak, and Suresh Balu, “AI on the Front Lines,” MIT Sloan Management Review, May 4, 2022, https://sloanreview.mit.edu/article/ai-on-the-front-lines/
  84. Zeynep Ton, “The Good Jobs Solution,” Harvard Business Review, 2017, 32. https://goodjobsinstitute.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Good-Jobs-Solution-Full-Report.pdf
  85. Abigail Gilbert et al., “Case for Importance: Understanding the Impacts of Technology Adoption on ‘Good Work’” (Institute for the Future of Work, May 2022), https://uploads-ssl.webflow.com/5f57d40eb1c2ef22d8a8ca7e/62a72d3439edd66ed6f79654_IFOW_Case%20for%20Importance.pdf
  86. Daniel Zhang et al., “The AI Index 2022 Annual Report” (AI Index Steering Committee, Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI, Stanford University, March 2022), https://aiindex.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2022-AI-Index-Report_Master.pdf
  87. Julian Posada, “The Future of Work Is Here: Toward a Comprehensive Approach to Artificial Intelligence and Labour,” Ethics of AI in Context, 2020, http://arxiv.org/abs/2007.05843
  88. Jeffrey Brown, “The Role of Attrition in AI’s ‘Diversity Problem’” (Partnership on AI, April 2021), https://partnershiponai.org//wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2022/04/PAI_researchpaper_aftertheoffer.pdf
  89. Tina M Park, “Making AI Inclusive: 4 Guiding Principles for Ethical Engagement” (Partnership on AI, July 2022), https://partnershiponai.org//wp-content/uploads/dlm_uploads/2022/07/PAI_whitepaper_making-ai-inclusive.pdf
  90. Fabio Urbina et al., “Dual Use of Artificial-Intelligence-Powered Drug Discovery,” Nature Machine Intelligence 4, no. 3 (March 2022): 189–91, https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-022-00465-9
  91. Aarathi Krishnan et al., “Decolonial AI Manyfesto,” accessed July 24, 2022, https://manyfesto.ai/
  92. Lama Nachman, “Beyond the Automation-Only Approach,” in Redesigning AI, Boston Review (MIT Press, 2021), https://bostonreview.net/forum_response/beyond-the-automation-only-approach/
  93. Christina Colclough, “Righting the Wrong: Putting Workers’ Data Rights Firmly on the Table,” in Digital Work in the Planetary Market, –International Development Research Centre Series (MIT Press, 2022), https://idl-bnc-idrc.dspacedirect.org/bitstream/handle/10625/61034/IDL-61034.pdf
  94. Christina Colclough, “When Algorithms Hire and Fire,” International Union Rights 25, no. 3 (2018): 6–7. https://muse.jhu.edu/article/838277/summary
  95. Brishen Rogers, “The Law and Political Economy of Workplace Technological Change,” Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review 55 (2020): 531
  96. Wilneida Negrón, “Little Tech Is Coming for Workers” (Coworker.org, 2021), https://home.coworker.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Little-Tech-Is-Coming-for-Workers.pdf
  97. Jeremias Adams-Prassl, “What If Your Boss Was an Algorithm? Economic Incentives, Legal Challenges, and the Rise of Artificial Intelligence at Work,” Comparative Labor Law u0026amp; Policy Journal 41 (2021 2019): 123
  98. Daniel Zhang et al., “The AI Index 2022 Annual Report” (AI Index Steering Committee, Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI, Stanford University, March 2022), https://aiindex.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2022-AI-Index-Report_Master.pdf
  99. Kofi Yeboah, “Artificial Intelligence in Sub-Saharan Africa: Ensuring Inclusivity.” (Paradigm Initiative, December 2021), https://paradigmhq.org/report/artificial-intelligence-in-sub-saharan-africa-ensuring-inclusivity/
  100. Fekitamoeloa ‘Utoikamanu, “Closing the Technology Gap in Least Developed Countries,” United Nations (United Nations), accessed July 25, 2022, https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/closing-technology-gap-least-developed-countries
  101. Annette Bernhardt, Lisa Kresge, and Reem Suleiman, “Data and Algorithms at Work: The Case for Worker” (UC Berkeley Labor Center, November 2021), https://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Data-and-Algorithms-at-Work.pdf
  102. Allison Levitsky, “California Might Require Employers to Disclose Workplace Surveillance,” Protocol, April 21, 2022, https://www.protocol.com/bulletins/ab-1651-california-workplace-surveillance
  103. “The EU Artificial Intelligence Act,” The AI Act, September 7, 2021, https://artificialintelligenceact.eu/
  104. Daron Acemoglu, Andrea Manera, and Pascual Restrepo, “Does the US Tax Code Favor Automation?,” Working Paper, Working Paper Series (National Bureau of Economic Research, April 2020), https://doi.org/10.3386/w27052
  105. Emmanuel Moss et al., “Assembling Accountability: Algorithmic Impact Assessment for the Public Interest” (Data and Society, June 2021), https://datasociety.net/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Assembling-Accountability.pdf
  106. Kofi Yeboah, “Artificial Intelligence in Sub-Saharan Africa: Ensuring Inclusivity.” (Paradigm Initiative, December 2021), https://paradigmhq.org/report/artificial-intelligence-in-sub-saharan-africa-ensuring-inclusivity/
  107. Daniel Zhang et al., “The AI Index 2022 Annual Report” (AI Index Steering Committee, Stanford Institute for Human-Centered AI, Stanford University, March 2022), https://aiindex.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2022-AI-Index-Report_Master.pdf
  108. Business Roundtable, “Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation,” July 2021, https://s3.amazonaws.com/brt.org/BRT-StatementonthePurposeofaCorporationJuly2021.pdf
  109. Larry Fink, “Larry Fink’s Annual 2022 Letter to CEOs,” accessed May 27, 2022, https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/investor-relations/larry-fink-ceo-letter
  110. Katanga Johnson, “U.S. SEC Chair Provides More Detail on New Disclosure Rules, Treasury Market Reform | Reuters,” https://www.reuters.com/business/sustainable-business/sec-considers-disclosure-mandate-range-climate-metrics-2021-06-23/
  111. “Your Guide to Amazon’s 2022 Shareholder Event,” United for Respect, accessed May 27, 2022, https://united4respect.org/amazon-shareholders/
Table of Contents
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10