AI monitoring: the legal risks Canadian HR leaders can’t ignore
When that pressure tips into unrealistic expectations, HR leaders may be setting the groundwork for a constructive dismissal claim or a psychological health and safety complaint, says Stam. Understanding how psychological safety obligations intersect with AI monitoring in Canadian workplaces is increasingly relevant as these tools proliferate.
Don’t wait for the law – act now
Stam is frank about the pace of legislative reform. Passing laws is slow. AI development is not. And when governments change, bills die on the order paper.
“Employers don’t have to wait for the law to change,” she says. “They can still roll out effective policies in the meantime – basic principles of transparency, training, awareness, being clear about expectations and where these AI tools will play a part – hopefully employers don’t need legislation to tell them to do those basic HR communications.”
Her message for attendees to the HRD Canada Employment Law Masterclass is to approach AI with curiosity, not fear.
“When I speak about AI, I’m not interested in fear mongering about it, and banning it is ridiculous, it’s not an option,” she says. “So how do we embrace AI in the workplace in a way that helps employers and employees, and engages our curiosity instead of our fear? There are lots of opportunities for employees to shift from a punching-the-clock, hourly existence into more of a project-based one because they’re using AI to employ a different way of doing their work.
