Employees are increasingly turning to AI to articulate grievances. This is creating challenges for employers around complexity, confidentiality, and fairness in grievance procedures. Clear policies and oversight are essential for effective management.
Increasingly, employees are turning to AI-powered tools to help articulate their concerns more clearly and professionally. On the surface, this can be a positive development: clearer communication, better structure, and more confidence in raising issues. However, this trend is also creating new challenges for employers, particularly in managing the scope, confidentiality, and fairness of grievance procedures.
Overly complex & lengthy grievances
One of the more immediate issues arising from the use of AI in grievance writing is the tendency for employees to submit overly long and complex documents. AI tools are designed to enhance and elaborate on input, often producing grievances that span multiple pages, include excessive detail, and feature issues that were not intended by the employee to be part of their grievance.
This can make it difficult for employers to decipher what the employee is actually complaining about. Is the grievance about a specific incident, a pattern of behaviour, or a broader cultural issue? Without clarity, employers risk misinterpreting the complaint or failing to address the most pressing concerns.
To mitigate this, employers should consider sitting down with the employee early in the process to define the real scope of the grievance. A structured conversation can help identify the key issues, clarify misunderstandings, and ensure that the grievance procedure focuses on resolving the actual problems rather than getting lost in the AI-generated issues. This approach not only streamlines the process but also fosters a more constructive dialogue between employer and employee. In the event that the grievance is not resolved and the employee takes the case to the Employment Tribunal, the risk of the Judge being handed a written grievance and set of tribunal notes that are conflicting is reduced due to the employee’s issues being clarified early on in the process.
AI in the workplace increasing grievances
Ironically, while AI is helping employees articulate grievances, the increasing use of AI by employers in the workplace is also contributing to the rise in grievances themselves. As employers adopt AI systems to manage tasks like shift scheduling, performance reviews, or workload distribution, there is a growing risk of perceived or actual bias existing in these automated decisions. For example, an AI system used to generate shift patterns might inadvertently favour certain employees over others due to flawed training data or algorithmic bias.
To prevent such issues, employers must ensure that AI systems are regularly audited and subject to human oversight. This includes reviewing the data used to train the AI, testing outputs for fairness, and maintaining a clear record of how decisions are made. Employers should also provide employees with a mechanism to challenge AI-generated decisions and seek human review where necessary.
Transparency is key. Employees are more likely to trust AI systems if they understand how they work and know that there is accountability behind the decisions being made. Employers should communicate openly about the role of AI in workplace processes and be proactive in addressing concerns before they escalate into formal grievances.
Risks of confidential information disclosure
Another significant concern is the risk of employees inadvertently sharing confidential or sensitive information with AI platforms when drafting grievances. Many AI tools operate in the cloud and may store user inputs to improve performance and enable them to provide more sophisticated responses to similar requests in future. Some AI platforms feature a ‘temporary chat’ option that can be used to prevent the AI platform from retaining the information and using it for training purposes. However, the risk of the confidential information being outside of the employer’s control and being used for an unintended purpose remains. If an employee includes names, internal documents, or commercially sensitive data in their prompt, this information could be exposed to third-party systems, creating serious data protection and confidentiality risks.
For employers, this raises both legal and reputational concerns. The use of unapproved AI platforms could lead to breaches of GDPR, internal data policies, or even contractual obligations with clients and partners.
To address this, employers should implement a clear and comprehensive AI usage policy. This policy should define which AI platforms are approved for use, what types of information can and cannot be shared, and the consequences of breaching these guidelines. If desired, the employer should request the employee’s consent to them screening any written communication, such as written grievances, on AI detection websites. Training sessions and awareness campaigns can also help employees understand the risks and responsibilities associated with AI use in the workplace. By setting boundaries and expectations, employers can protect and remain in control of sensitive data while still allowing employees to benefit from using AI tools.
Conclusion
The integration of AI into grievance procedures and broader workplace functions presents both opportunities and challenges. On one hand, AI can empower employees to express their concerns more effectively and help employers streamline internal processes. On the other hand, it introduces risks around complexity, confidentiality, and fairness that must be carefully managed.
To navigate this evolving landscape, employers should:
- engage with employees early to clarify the scope of grievances and avoid misinterpretation
- implement a robust AI policy that governs the use of AI tools and protects sensitive information
- audit and oversee AI systems used in workplace decision-making to ensure fairness and transparency
Disclaimer
This information is for general information purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It is recommended that specific professional advice is sought before acting on any of the information given. Please contact us for specific advice on your circumstances. © Shoosmiths LLP 2025.