Shaping the Future of Work: A Conversation on AI, Collective Bargaining, and Worker Power

Let’s start with the why. What made this project so urgent at the time?

Oliver: We all agree that new technologies at the workplace are fundamentally changing the world of work. Besides the positive impact, like helping with tasks such as shift scheduling or taking over repetitive work and creating more space for creative tasks, they also bring new challenges. These include workplace surveillance, higher pressure, and less control over data and privacy.

The project shows that collective bargaining is becoming an essential tool for regulating technological innovation at work. At the same time, there is still a lot of work to do, as in many countries these topics are still not widely addressed. Important issues such as the right to challenge automated decision-making, training for staff and management on new AI tools, or the right to consult external data experts are often still missing from agreements.

This project aims to raise awareness about the need to include issues related to AI and algorithmic management at work in collective bargaining. We also want to promote the debate among trade unions and at policy level. At the same time, we want to highlight good examples of agreements that can inspire trade unions to start negotiations on these topics.

Birte: When we launched the project in 2022 - 2023, AI was just emerging as a collective bargaining issue. Trade unions were flooded with concerns about health and safety, clocking of working hours, and increased workloads, but there was a huge knowledge gap. Workers and unions didn’t understand how these technologies worked, let alone how to negotiate around them. Our first survey, done among UNI Europa members in 2023, revealed a lack of information, consultation, and awareness, despite it also being the time when the EU AI Act was being debated. We realized that if we would not act, trade unions would be left reacting to this change and not helping to shape it.

Our first wave of research was a turning point. The research really showed that AI wasn’t just a tech issue but it was and is a workers’ rights issue. And the response was remarkable but still quite limited and many of the expected countries would come up: our affiliates in the Nordic countries, Germany and other places. By the second wave, we saw a clear shift: collective agreements with AI clauses started popping up across Europe, and especially from Spain and Italy. We were not expecting it but upon closer examination a few things became clear. Spain, for example, negotiated a landmark national framework requiring all new CBAs to include AI or digitalisation provisions, paving the way for a wave of new agreements that included references to AI and machine learning. On the other hand, we saw a massive spike in Italy which can be explained from a great interest from many unions making the topic a priority as well as pragmatism. Italy’s new agreements are incredibly pragmatic and clear, focusing on specific technologies like AI agents in contact centres, not just vague statements. For example, instead of broad statements like “workers must be consulted,” they name the technology such as AI chatbots and algorithmic scheduling and set clear rules within the negotiations. This specificity makes it easier to anticipate risks and negotiate safeguards.

How does this project fill gaps that regulation alone can’t address?

Oliver: Regulations like the EU AI Act or Europe’s GDPR which are focusing on data privacy and worker protection, as well as the EU Platform Work Directive which has an interesting chapter on algorithmic management, are critical but it moves slowly and enforcement is even slower. Collective bargaining on the other hand can act fast at the local level, closing gaps where laws fall short. And these processes need to happen simultaneously. Our project highlights that while some countries, like Italy and Spain, are leading the charge in the next wave of research (conducted in 2025), while others are still catching up.

Birte: We’re not just collecting and analysing the CBAs, we are really trying to embed the learnings in trade union advocacy, awareness raising, capacity building and ensuring guidelines. However, this may not be the case everywhere, the divide between Central and Eastern Europe and Southern Europe still exists. This is because organisations with many day-to-day issues, ongoing strikes, and survival concerns don't have time for awareness-raising training. It's also a question of how comfortable you are in your national situation, and whether you have the capacity to address the issue or if other things take priority. Priorities may differ from country to country, and in addition, it's a growing topic that we need to keep on the agenda and why peer learning is so important. Our project shares examples globally, because tech companies don’t stop at borders. We’ve seen agreements in Argentina and South Africa, and our Asian colleagues are eager to learn. AI is a global challenge and the response of the trade unions must be too.

Because of the interest in the topic, the research travels far and is presented at various high-level conferences across Europe. How can we embed the learnings from the research in policy agendas and debates?

Oliver: Over the past 2-3 years we’ve organised quite a few workshops and presented the work at major conferences where the results from the studies (Phase I and Phase II) were highlighted, such as the Forward through Collective Bargaining series where we brought together unions, policymakers, and researchers to dig into the practicalities of negotiating AI. We showcased the dashboard, discussed the study’s findings, and brainstormed how to scale these practices across Europe. One key takeaway: Enforcement matters as much as the rules themselves. You can have the best CBA on AI, but if management ignores it, it’s worthless. We’re pushing for resources and support for works councils to monitor compliance.

At the Competence Centre Future of Work of the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung in Brussels, we focus on the digital transformation of the world of work. We work towards a fair future of work where workers’ rights and good working conditions are just as important as competitiveness and innovation. The regulation of new technologies at work is therefore a crucial topic for trade unions, but also for policymakers and civil society.

At a time when Europe is increasingly discussing digital sovereignty, competitiveness, and innovation, quality jobs and good working conditions are becoming more and more important and a real asset. To achieve this, the fair use of algorithmic management and AI at work is crucial. That is why agreements and clear rules on these issues are so important. The debate around regulating AI at work is more advanced in some countries. Our aim is to promote this debate across as many European countries as possible. That is why we work together with our country offices across Europe to bring these discussions to national trade unions and policy-makers. For example, we organised another event around this project in France in April 2026 and will soon continue this work in Ireland in June 2026.

Parts of the conversations and results from the interviews with the trade union leaders are also about the risks of AI replacing workers or increasing workloads. What’s the reality on the ground?

Birte: The truth is, no one knows the full impact yet. Companies are buying off-the-shelf AI tools without asking if they’re useful, justified, or even safe. In contact centres, for example, AI + algorithmic management can create a pressure cooker: productivity goes up, but so do burnout, stress, and health risks.

The Italian agreements show the way forward. By naming the technology and its risks, unions can negotiate concrete safeguards like limits on surveillance, transparency in decision-making, and the right to human oversight. It’s about redistributing the benefits of AI not just the burdens.

What’s next for this project? How do we keep the momentum going?

Oliver & Birte: We are focussing on three interconnected fronts:

1. Legal frameworks: Push for stronger enforcement of existing regulations (like GDPR) and new protections in the AI Act.
2. Awareness: More events, more training, like our Labor.A 2024 conference in Berlin, where we presented the research to a global audience
3. Tools for unions: The dashboard and database are just the start.

The insights and the CBA database can support unions in creating checklists, get inspiration for model clauses, and work on negotiation guides to make the topic more digestible and easier to act upon.

And we’re looking ahead to new frontiers. The digital supply chain - content moderation, data annotation - is a hotspot. Workers in Kenya, the Philippines, and beyond are organizing around health and safety risks because of their work in the global AI supply chain. International solidarity is non-negotiable. Big Tech is global; our response must be too.

On a final note: if a trade union leader is reading this, what’s the one thing they should do tomorrow?

Oliver: Start the conversation. Look at our dashboard. Pick one clause and bring it to your next bargaining session. Even a small step can shift the power balance.

Birte: And demand transparency. If your employer is using AI, ask: What is it? How does it work? What’s the impact on workers, and do we really need this within our operations? What justifies working on and with AI in relation to the work that needs to be done? Information is power. Our 2024 study and project page are packed with examples to inspire action.

Explore More:

• 2024 Study: Collective Bargaining Practices on AI
• Interactive Dashboard of AI Clauses in CBAs
• Global Database of AI & Algorithmic Management in CBAs
• Upcoming Events & Conferences