According to the Finance Sector Union (FSU), 36 per cent of finance workers said they often used AI, almost double what was seen last year (19 per cent). On top of this, just 13 per cent of workers indicated that they never use AI, down from 24 per cent last year, showing the growing prevalence and uptake of this technology in the finance sector.
This includes the use of AI for writing statements of advice.
But with the growing reliance on AI, around half of workers are reporting their level of monitoring via camera or keystroke monitoring as high or very high, with more than half saying this harms their wellbeing.
At the same time, 70 per cent of workers told the union they believe AI threatens their job security, a notable increase from 60 per cent last year.
The FSU said: “Compared to last year, every measure has worsened. Fear is rising, transparency remains low and surveillance concerns have intensified. Women and older workers continue to fall behind.”
Research by EY found 68 per cent of wealth and asset managers say they anticipate “substantial workforce transformations” within the next five years from the use of AI, particularly for middle and back-office roles.
Recent moves by financial services firms focused on AI include Insignia’s focus on utilising AI to reduce the cost to serve and increase efficiency and profitability in advice, as part of its Vision 2030 strategy. An AI-enabled advice ecosystem will streamline and automate activities across the advice process, it said, and can be used for an AI-powered assistant, knowledge hub and client service agreements.
Meanwhile, Iress has appointed a chief AI officer, FNZ has launched an AdvisorAI solution to scale personalised advice and CFS and AMP have both partnered with Sydney universities to research responsible development of AI solutions.
AI governance by boards
While employees are expressing concern with their jobs, a Diligent Institute survey, conducted in partnership with the Governance Institute of Australia (GIA) and the Singapore Institute of Directors (SID), found Australian boards are placing a greater priority on AI and digital transformation.
However, they are failing to implement sufficient governance or oversight to manage risks that arise.
Despite enthusiasm for implementing this technology, the report found that just 13 per cent of Australian boards have recruited AI-savvy directors and only one in five (21 per cent) mandate director training on AI, indicating a potential governance gap as adoption of AI continues to outpace oversight.
As AI continues its rapid growth within Australian businesses, 43 per cent of surveyed governance leaders in Australia said AI adoption is at the top of their strategic agendas, while three in five (61 per cent) of organisations have now restricted or defined AI use by employees.
Notably, Australian boards appear to be somewhat more cautious than their Asian peers as they are twice as likely to restrict employee AI use than their Asian counterparts (30 per cent).
However, Australian boards are also more likely to lack AI expertise at the director level, with 28 per cent of Asian boards employing AI-savvy leadership, which the report said is most likely a result of a skill shortage in Australian.
While the rate of AI adoption accelerates, FSU national assistant secretary Nicole McPherson said worker protections have failed to keep pace, and “workers are paying the price”.
“Workers are being pushed into using AI without consultation, training or transparency. Lawmakers and employers have completely failed to match the speed of this change. A digital just transition is essential. Workers must be consulted, trained and protected. Their data must be safe and surveillance limited,” McPherson said.
“And if AI changes or replaces roles, workers must have real pathways to redeployment. The four pillars of a just transition are the foundations of a fair digital future.”
