Artificial intelligence (AI) has become an ever-increasing presence in the workplace. AI transcription products can help employees focus on more meaningful work by taking over such rote tasks as note taking or transcribing meetings. But, as with any workplace tool, some caution is necessary.
In balancing the risks and benefits of AI transcription devices, employers should consider the following:
- Inaccurate transcripts can reflect poorly on a company years down the road.
- Some wiretap laws require all meeting attendees to consent to recordings.
- Some privacy laws limit the disclosure of personal information.
- Transcripts can be used as evidence if the company is later sued.
Accuracy Concerns
As with any technology, there is a risk that AI-generated transcripts and meeting notes may contain errors. Conversations can be misinterpreted, nuances missed, and key points taken out of context. This is particularly true when employees are discussing complicated issues, using idioms or insider terminology, referring to visual information that is not read into the transcription technology, or when people are talking over each other during meetings.
An AI transcript tool, without all of the necessary context, can also mishear words and phrases.
For this reason, employers who choose to use AI transcription should consider having a meeting attendee skim or review any AI-generated notes or transcripts to correct any inaccuracies at the time the transcript is made. At the very least, AI notes and transcripts should be cross-referenced with recordings and any notes taken by attendees.
Ultimately, having a human available to review automated transcripts could spell the difference between a “poor plan” and a “performance plan” or “sweeping the rug” and “sweeping something under the rug.”
Employee Consent Is Crucial
Recording and obtaining an AI-generated transcript of a meeting without first obtaining the consent of all participants could also run afoul of wiretap laws in the United States, as well as privacy laws outside the U.S. Some U.S. states require everyone who participates in a conversation to consent before it can be recorded. These states include California, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Hampshire, and Pennsylvania.
Issues can arise when, for example, a meeting is held in a state that does not require all participants to consent to a recording, but employees dial in remotely to the meeting from a state where all attendees are required to consent to a recording. Trying to identify which laws apply in any given circumstance is probably not feasible, as a practical matter.
And for companies with global operations, there can be additional complications. Legal regimes in the United Kingdom and European Union, in particular, have consent requirements that differ from those in the U.S. For example, implicit consent (i.e., remaining on a call after being informed of the recording) is generally sufficient for U.S. purposes even in states that require all attendees to consent. But EU laws require attendees to take a proactive step (such as clicking a box or a button) to demonstrate consent.
As a best practice, employers who use an AI transcription tool should have a plan in place to obtain consent from all meeting attendees before turning on the device. Many videoconferencing platforms offer disclaimers and consent opportunities for any meeting that is being recorded. When international attendees are joining a meeting, employers may wish to consider having everyone sign in and check a box acknowledging the recording. Ultimately, obtaining consent is crucial when it comes to traditional recording methods and any AI-generated transcripts.
Privacy Concerns
Companies should also consider privacy laws when discussing the personal information of employees during recorded meetings. While most U.S. privacy laws do not apply to information obtained from employees, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) is the exception, and requires companies to disclose to employees what personal information the company collects, how it uses that information, and how long personal information is kept (among other things). Any relevant HR notices should be drafted or updated to include the appropriate disclosures.
The CCPA also provides individuals with rights regarding their personal information, including the right to request access to that information, or request that it be deleted. Companies should consider how to handle such requests in the context of a recorded meeting. Companies operating on a global level will also need to consider how to safeguard the privacy of employees under the laws of other jurisdictions.
Evidence-Gathering Tool
Employers should also be aware that AI-generated notes and transcripts — much like emails and other company documents — can become discoverable evidence. That means that employers have an obligation to ensure that these AI-generated notes, transcripts, and any associated data are both accessible and preserved in the event of an actual or threatened lawsuit against the company.
That also means that meeting participants should be aware of and consider that anything said during these meetings could become evidence in a future lawsuit against the company. And additional caution is warranted whenever legal counsel is present to ensure that the attorney-client privilege is maintained wherever applicable.
Key Takeaways
These are just a few of the concerns employers may want to weigh when considering an AI transcription tool. Fortunately, there are steps that employers can and should consider taking to mitigate risks associated with AI transcription tools:
- Ensure that all AI-generated meeting notes and transcripts are reviewed for accuracy.
- Take steps so that all meeting attendees are informed and properly consent, under all applicable laws, before meetings are transcribed.
- Everyone in the meeting should understand that transcribed conversations can be used as evidence if the company is later sued.
- Consider using a tool that provides a high-level summary of the topics discussed during a meeting, rather than a word-for-word transcription.
- Consider not using AI to transcribe every meeting, particularly sensitive discussions regarding staffing issues or potential litigation.
Finally, as with any technology in the workplace, awareness is key. While there are undeniable benefits to using AI transcription technology in the workplace, those benefits should always be weighed with the risks in any workplace.
D. Andrew Quigley and Veronica A. Torrejón are attorneys with Hunton in Los Angeles. Olivia Lee is an attorney with Hunton in London.
Was this resource helpful?
Validate your HR expertise
Earning your SHRM-CP credential makes you a recognized expert and leader in the HR field.
Related Content
Learn how Marsh McLennan successfully boosts staff well-being with digital tools, improving productivity and work satisfaction for more than 20,000 employees.
The proliferation of artificial intelligence in the workplace, and the ensuing expected increase in productivity and efficiency, could help usher in the four-day workweek, some experts predict.
As artificial intelligence technology continues to develop, the demand for workers with the ability to work alongside and manage AI systems will increase. This means that workers who are not able to adapt and learn these new skills will be left behind in the job market.