AFTERNOON, AND WELCOME TO OUR
JOINT INFORMATIONAL HEARING ON
AI IN THE WORKPLACE. I WOULD
LIKE TO START BY THANKING OUR
PRIVACY AND CONSUMER PROTECTION
CHAIR, REBECCA BAUER-KAHAN, FOR
ATTENDING TODAY'S HEARING, AS
WELL AS COMMITTEE MEMBERS,
ASSEMBLY MEMBER ERWIN AND
ASSEMBLY MEMBER DIXON. WE WILL
HAVE OTHER MEMBERS JOINING US
THROUGHOUT THE HEARING, AND I
WILL ACKNOWLEDGE THEM WHEN THEY
COME IN. TODAY'S HEARING FOCUSES
ON AI'S IMPACT ON WORKERS. THIS
YEAR WE HAVE CONSIDERED DOZENS
OF BILLS RELATED TO AI, AND IT
SEEMS THAT EVERYWHERE WE GO,
THAT'S ALL WE HEAR ABOUT IS AI.
EXCUSE ME. HOWEVER, THE ONE
THING THAT WE HAVEN'T REALLY
HEARD MUCH ABOUT IS AI'S IMPACT
ON WORKERS. AS CHAIR OF THE
LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE,
I WANT TO ENSURE THAT WORKERS
VOICES ARE NOT LEFT OUT OF THE
CONVERSATION, AND I WANT TO MAKE
SOMETHING VERY CLEAR. I'M NOT
OPPOSED TO PROGRESS OR
TECHNOLOGY. I'M HOPING MAYBE ONE
DAY, THEY CAN HAVE AN AI VERSION
OF MYSELF BEING IN THREE PLACES
AT ONCE IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR
MANY OF US. BUT MY CONCERN IS
THAT WHEN LACK OF REGULATION. I
HAVE WATCHED THE PROMISE OF AI
TURN AMAZON WAREHOUSES INTO
SPEEDWAYS THAT EXHAUST THE
WORKFORCE, AND WHERE STOPWATCHES
ARE THE ONES DOING THE FIRING.
WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT AI
COMPLEMENTS AND SUPPORTS OUR
WORKFORCE, RATHER THAN REPLACE
THEIR BOSS, OR EVEN THE JOB
ITSELF. OUR WITNESSES TODAY
INCLUDE WORKERS, ACADEMIC
RESEARCHERS AND INDUSTRY EXPERTS
WHO WILL SHARE MORE ABOUT THE
LANDSCAPE OF AI. TODAY'S HEARING
WILL BE DIVIDED INTO THREE
PANELS. AFTER EACH PANEL, WE
WILL HAVE SOME TIME FOR
COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO ASK
QUESTIONS, AND AT THE END OF THE
HEARING, WE WILL TAKE PUBLIC
COMMENT. CHAIR BAUER-KAHAN,
WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE SOME
OPENING REMARKS? YES. THANK YOU,
MADAM CHAIR. I WANT TO START BY
THANKING YOU FOR CONVENING THIS
REALLY IMPORTANT CONVERSATION
TODAY, AND I WANT TO THANK I
WANT TO REITERATE MY THANKS TO
THE MEMBERS OF THE PRIVACY
COMMITTEE THAT ARE HERE TO JOIN
IN THE CONVERSATION. OUR
COMMITTEE HAS HEARD, I BELIEVE,
ALMOST ALL OF THOSE ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE BILLS, WHICH YOU
REFERENCED, MANY OF THEM THAT
AFFECT THE WORKERS THAT WE HEAR
FROM TODAY. AND, AND ALSO
THERE'S BEEN AN ABSENCE OF BILLS
THAT WOULD HELP PROTECT THOSE
WORKERS AS WELL. SO THE BILLS WE
HEARD AND THE BILLS WE DIDN'T
HEAR, I THINK ARE IMPORTANT TO
TALK ABOUT, BOTH TODAY. I HAVE
LONG SAID THAT I BELIEVE THAT
THE POTENTIAL OF ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE, AS CHAIR ORTEGA
SAID, IS INCREDIBLY EXCITING.
YOU KNOW, I MENTIONED OFTEN THE
ABILITY FOR AI TO DETECT CANCER
BEFORE THE HUMAN EYE. CAN IT
SAVES LIVES. THAT AUGMENTS THE
WORK OF THOSE PHYSICIANS AND
NURSES THAT WORK SO HARD TO SAVE
THE LIVES OF OUR CANCER PATIENTS
IN CALIFORNIA, THE BENEFITS I'VE
HEARD FROM PEOPLE IN THE
EDUCATIONAL SPACE ABOUT USING
THESE TECHNOLOGIES TO AUGMENT
THEIR ABILITY TO TEACH STUDENTS
TO READ THAT, LEARN DIFFERENTLY,
THAT DON'T REPLACE ANYBODY, BUT
HELP AUGMENT THE WORKFORCE, TO
MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE IS
GETTING MET THE WAY THEY CAN,
AND IN WAYS THAT I THINK ARE
INCREDIBLY EXCITING. BUT THAT
PIECE THAT I JUST TALKED ABOUT,
I THINK IS CRUCIAL TO THE
CONVERSATIONS WE'RE HAVING TODAY
AND I THINK WAS AT THE HEART OF
WHAT CHAIR ORTEGA WAS TALKING
ABOUT, WHICH IS AUGMENTATION
RATHER THAN REPLACEMENT. WHAT
DOES IT MEAN TO USE THESE
TECHNOLOGIES TO BETTER SERVE
CALIFORNIANS BUT NOT DISRUPT OUR
WORKFORCE IN SUCH A WAY THAT
HURTS CALIFORNIANS? WE'RE LIVING
IN A MOMENT IN HISTORY WHERE
INCOME INEQUALITY IS AT AN ALL
TIME HIGH, WHERE PEOPLE ARE
STRUGGLING TO LIVE IN OUR
COMMUNITIES BECAUSE THEY DON'T
HAVE GOOD PAYING JOBS, BENEFITS
THAT HELP WITH THEIR HEALTH CARE
AND KEEP THEM SAFE AND HEALTHY.
AND THE WORK THAT THE LABOR AND
EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE DOES AND
THAT THIS LEGISLATURE DOES TO
ENSURE THAT CALIFORNIA RAISES
ALL OF CALIFORNIANS WAGES,
WORKING CONDITIONS AND THE
ABILITY TO RETIRE WITH DIGNITY,
BENEFITS, ETC, IS CRITICAL TO
THE WORK WE DO. AND IN ANY
INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION, WE KNOW
IT'S SOMETHING WE NEED TO PAY
ATTENTION TO. AND AS LEADERS OF
THIS STATE, THIS IS SOMETHING
THAT WE NEED TO BE TALKING ABOUT
AND WORKING TOWARDS TO ENSURE
THAT AS THIS REVOLUTION HAPPENS,
WORKERS ARE AT THE TABLE. AS
CHAIR, ORTEGA SAID, THEY ARE
PART OF THE CONVERSATION. THEY
ARE HELPING US LEARN HOW TO
IMPLEMENT THIS IN A WAY THAT
HELPS CALIFORNIANS AND DOESN'T
HURT, THOSE THAT WILL BE
AFFECTED BY THIS WORK. EARLIER
THIS YEAR, WE HELD A HEARING IN,
PARTNERSHIP WITH THE ARTS AND
ENTERTAINMENT COMMITTEE, FOCUSED
IN LARGE PART ON THE IMPACT IT
HAS ALREADY HAD ON THEIR
WORKFORCE. AND I KNOW WE HAVE
SOMEONE HERE FROM THE SCREEN
ACTORS GUILD TO TESTIFY TODAY,
BUT IT WAS INCREDIBLY POWERFUL
TO HEAR THE ARTISTS IN HOLLYWOOD
TALK ABOUT THE WAY THEIR WORK
HAS ALREADY BEEN REPLACED,
IMPACTING THEIR LIVELIHOODS,
THEIR JOBS, THEIR INDUSTRIES,
AND ALSO THE MAGICAL ART THE
CALIFORNIA BELIEVES AND ENJOYS.
SO DEEPLY. AND SO IT'S
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE
CONTINUE TO KEEP OUR EYE ON THE
BALL AS WE PROTECT CALIFORNIA'S
WORKFORCE, AS WE PROTECT
CALIFORNIA'S ECONOMY, AS WE SEE
THIS INNOVATION HAPPEN, THAT
THOSE WORKERS ARE A PART OF THAT
CONVERSATION. AND SO I REALLY
APPRECIATE THIS LINEUP TODAY AND
WHO WE'RE HEARING FROM. I THINK
IT'S ALSO CRITICALLY IMPORTANT
THAT WE SEE A PARTNERSHIP. YOU
KNOW, I DO THINK THAT IT'S
IMPORTANT THAT OUR WORKERS AND
OUR EMPLOYERS ARE HAVING THIS
CONVERSATION TOGETHER TO MOVE
THINGS FORWARD SO THAT WORKERS
AREN'T BEING SURVEILLED IN WAYS
THAT HARM THEM, THAT THEY HAVE,
YOU KNOW, THE DIGNITY THEY
DESERVE IN THEIR WORK AND MOST
OF OUR WORKERS. AND I'M SURE
WE'LL HEAR THIS TODAY. THEY LOVE
THEIR WORK. THEY WANT TO
CONTINUE TO DO THEIR WORK, AND
THEY WANT TO DO IT WELL. AND
THEY'RE PROUD OF WHAT THEY DO.
AND WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO
PROVIDE AN ENVIRONMENT FOR EVERY
WORKER TO DO THAT. AND I CAN BE
HOPEFULLY, IF WE DO THIS RIGHT,
BE A WAY TO HELP THAT AND NOT
HARM IT, BUT TO DO IT RIGHT, WE
NEED TO LEARN AND BE ON TOP OF
IT. SO I APPRECIATE CHAIR ORTEGA
AND ALL OF OUR STAFF FROM BOTH
THE PRIVACY COMMITTEE AND THE
LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT COMMITTEE
FOR THEIR HARD WORK CONVENING
THIS HEARING. THANK YOU. THANK
YOU, UNLESS ANY OTHER MEMBERS
WOULD LIKE TO MAKE COMMENTS, I
WOULD LIKE TO CALL UP OUR FIRST
PANEL. SO OUR PANEL NUMBER ONE
WILL BE, DOCTOR ANNETTE
BERNHARDT, DIRECTOR OF THE
TECHNOLOGY AND WORK PROGRAM AT
UC BERKELEY LABOR CENTER. AND
SARAH FLAX, LEGISLATIVE AND
STRATEGIC CAMPAIGNS DIRECTOR FOR
THE CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION.
OH, YEAH. DOCTOR, SHE'S ON. OH,
DOCTOR BERNHARDT IS ON, JOINING
US REMOTELY. GOOD AFTERNOON
EVERYBODY. CAN FOLKS HEAR ME?
OKAY. CAN WE HEAR HER? OKAY,
OKAY. YES, WE CAN HEAR YOU.
OKAY. WONDERFUL. GOOD AFTERNOON
EVERYONE. MY NAME IS ANITA
BERNHARDT, AND I DIRECT THE
TECHNOLOGY AND WORK PROGRAM AT
THE UC BERKELEY LABOR CENTER,
DOCTOR? DOCTOR. BERNARD. SORRY.
LET ME. I'M GOING TO PAUSE YOU
REAL QUICKLY. I WANT TO SEE IF
WE CAN GET THE VOLUME UP IN THE
ROOM. IF THERE'S A WAY OF DOING
THAT. TESTING, TESTING, TESTING,
TESTING. TESTING TESTING.
TESTING. TESTING. YES, WE GOT IT.
OKAY, NOW WE ARE GOOD TO GO. YES
OKAY. WONDERFUL. AGAIN. MY NAME
IS ANITA BERNARD. I DIRECT THE
TECHNOLOGY AND WORK PROGRAM AT
THE UC BERKELEY LABOR CENTER. IT
REALLY WANT TO THANK CHAIRS.
ORTEGA AND BAUER-KAHAN FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH ALL OF
YOU TODAY, AND ESPECIALLY FOR
YOUR LEADERSHIP AND CALIFORNIA'S
EFFORTS TO BE A NATIONAL MODEL
ON AI POLICY, FOR THE PAST FIVE
YEARS, MY TEAM AND I HAVE BEEN
CONDUCTING RESEARCH AND POLICY
ANALYSIS OF AI AND OTHER DATA
DRIVEN TECHNOLOGIES, WITH THE
GOAL OF ENSURING THAT WORKING
FAMILIES ARE ABLE TO THRIVE IN
THE 21ST CENTURY ECONOMY. AND
I'D LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU TODAY
SEVERAL OBSERVATIONS FROM OUR
WORK. SO TO START, IT IS
ABSOLUTELY CLEAR THAT EMPLOYERS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY ARE
INCREASINGLY USING DATA IN
ALGORITHMS IN WAYS THAT STAND TO
HAVE PROFOUND CONSEQUENCES FOR
WAGES, WORKING CONDITIONS, RACE
AND GENDER EQUITY, AND WORKER
POWER. AND HERE ARE JUST A FEW
EXAMPLES, HIRING SOFTWARE NOW
CAN RANK JOB APPLICANTS BASED ON
THEIR TONE OF VOICE DURING VIDEO
INTERVIEWS, ALGORITHMS ARE BEING
USED TO PREDICT WHETHER WORKERS
WILL QUIT OR BECOME PREGNANT, OR
TRY TO ORGANIZE A UNION, CALL
CENTER TECHNOLOGIES OR ANALYZING
CUSTOMER CALLS IN REAL TIME AND
THEN NUDGING WORKERS TO ADJUST
THEIR BEHAVIOR. THE RETAIL
INDUSTRY IS USING JUST IN TIME
SCHEDULING SOFTWARE, OFTEN
WREAKING HAVOC ON WORKERS LIVES
WITH IMPOSSIBLE SCHEDULES. AND
AS HAS ALREADY BEEN MENTIONED,
AMAZON'S WAREHOUSE WORKERS
ENDURE CONSTANT PRODUCTIVITY
TRACKING, PUSHING THE PACE OF
WORK TO AN ALARMING RATE AND
PUTTING THEIR HEALTH AT RISK. I
WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT THESE
WORKPLACE TECHNOLOGIES VARY
SIGNIFICANTLY. THEY RANGE FROM
SIMPLE PAYROLL SYSTEMS TO TASK
DETECTION SOFTWARE TO COMPLEX
MODELS PREDICTING WORKER
APTITUDES AND BEHAVIOR. AND NOW,
OF COURSE, GENERATIVE AI. IN MY
MIND, THE APPROPRIATE FOCUS FOR
REGULATION IS THIS BROAD RANGE
OF DATA DRIVEN TECHNOLOGIES, NOT
JUST ONE PARTICULAR TYPE. AND IN
ALL CASES, THE CORE PROBLEM IS
THAT EMPLOYERS ARE INTRODUCING
THESE OFTEN UNTESTED
TECHNOLOGIES WITH ALMOST NO
REGULATION AND OVERSIGHT.
CURRENTLY, IN THE US, WORKERS
LARGELY DO NOT HAVE THE RIGHT TO
KNOW WHAT DATA IS BEING GATHERED
ON THEM OR WHETHER IT'S BEING
SOLD. THEY DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT
TO REVIEW OR CORRECT THEIR DATA.
EMPLOYERS ARE NOT REQUIRED TO
NOTIFY WORKERS ABOUT ELECTRONIC
MONITORING OR WHEN THEY USE
ALGORITHMS TO MAKE EMPLOYMENT
DECISIONS, AND WORKERS DON'T
HAVE THE RIGHT TO CHALLENGE
THOSE DECISIONS. MOST
IMPORTANTLY, THERE ARE VIRTUALLY
NO MEANINGFUL GUARDRAILS,
MEANINGFUL GUARDRAILS ON WHICH
TECHNOLOGIES EMPLOYERS CAN USE
AND HOW THEY USE THEM IN THEIR
WORKPLACES. AS A RESULT, THERE
IS BROAD CONSENSUS AMONG LEGAL
SCHOLARS THAT EXISTING
EMPLOYMENT AND LABOR LAWS ARE
INADEQUATE TO THE TASK OF
PROTECTING WORKERS IN THE DATA
DRIVEN WORKPLACE. LAST YEAR,
WORKERS IN CALIFORNIA DID GAIN
SOME BASIC RIGHTS UNDER THE CCPA,
BUT THOSE REALLY ARE NO
SUBSTITUTE FOR THE TYPES OF
BROAD PROTECTIONS THAT WORKERS
HAVE. FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE 27
COUNTRIES OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,
THE CRITICAL POINT IS THAT THIS
REGULATORY VACUUM IN THE US
OPENS THE DOOR TO A WIDE RANGE
OF POTENTIAL HARMS TO WORKERS. I
WILL SAY WE ARE ONLY BEGINNING
TO UNDERSTAND HOW DIGITAL
TECHNOLOGIES IMPACT WORKERS, BUT
THERE IS ALREADY EVIDENCE OF A
RANGE OF HARMS, INCLUDING WORK
INTENSIFICATION AND SPEED UP
DE-SKILLING AND AUTOMATION,
HAZARDOUS WORKING CONDITIONS,
DISCRIMINATION, GROWTH AND
CONTINGENT WORK, LOWER WAGES,
LOSS OF AUTONOMY, AUTONOMY AND
PRIVACY BEING BLAMED AND
PENALIZED WHEN THE TECH MAKES
ERRORS AND SUPPRESSION OF THE
RIGHT TO ORGANIZE AND OF
PARTICULAR CONCERN IS THAT
WORKERS OF COLOR, WOMEN AND
IMMIGRANTS BOTH FACE DIRECT
DISCRIMINATION VIA BIASES IN THE
TECHNOLOGY ITSELF AND ARE ALSO
MORE LIKELY TO WORK IN
OCCUPATIONS AT THE FRONT LINES
OF TECHNOLOGICAL
EXPERIMENTATION. BUT I WOULD SAY
THESE HARMS ARE NOT AT ALL
INEVITABLE. I BELIEVE WE
CURRENTLY STAND AT THE JUNCTURE
OF TWO VERY DIFFERENT PATHS
GOING FORWARD ON THE ONE HAND,
THERE IS A DYSTOPIAN PATH WHERE
EMPLOYERS USE TECHNOLOGY TO CUT
LABOR COSTS BY EXPLOITING OR
DISPLACING WORKERS. AND THERE IS
ALSO A HIGH ROAD PATH WHERE
EMPLOYERS USE TECHNOLOGY TO
AUGMENT AND SUPPORT WORKERS,
ENABLING THEM TO GAIN NEW SKILLS
WHILE ALSO RAISING PRODUCTIVITY.
THE POLICY CHOICES WE MAKE TODAY
WILL DETERMINE WHICH PATH WE
TAKE, AND SPECIFICALLY, I WOULD
ARGUE, WE NEED A NEW SET OF 21ST
CENTURY LABOR STANDARDS THAT
ESTABLISH WORKER RIGHTS AND
EMPLOYER RESPONSIBILITIES FOR
THE DATA DRIVEN WORKPLACE, MUCH
LIKE THE FOUNDATIONAL STANDARDS
THAT WE LAID DOWN IN THE LAST
CENTURY AROUND WAGES AND WORKING
CONDITIONS, THESE STANDARDS
SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED BOTH IN
PUBLIC POLICY AND IN COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AGREEMENTS. YOU WILL
HEAR MORE DETAIL FROM THE
PANELISTS THAT FOLLOW, BUT I'D
LIKE TO LIFT UP JUST SOME OF THE
PRINCIPLES THAT UNIONS AND OTHER
WORKER ADVOCATES HAVE DEVELOPED
OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS
REGARDING AI AND OTHER DATA
DRIVEN TECH. TRANSPARENCY
WORKERS SHOULD ABSOLUTELY HAVE
THE RIGHT TO KNOW ABOUT ALL DATA
DRIVEN TECHNOLOGIES BEING USED
IN THE WORKPLACE, INCLUDING AI
GUARDRAILS. WE ABSOLUTELY NEED
ROBUST STANDARDS TO ENSURE
RESPONSIBLE USE WHEN EMPLOYERS
MONITOR WORKERS, WHEN THEY MAKE
DECISIONS BASED ON ALGORITHMS,
OR WHEN THEY DEPLOY TECHNOLOGIES
THAT AUTOMATE OR AUGMENT WORKERS
TASKS. AND IN ADDITION, USE OF
UNPROVEN OR QUESTIONABLE
TECHNOLOGIES. WHAT ARE OFTEN
CALLED SNAKE OIL TECH SHOULD BE
PROHIBITED. HUMANS AND COMMAND
WORKERS SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO
OVERRIDE THE SYSTEMS THEY WORK
WITH IN ORDER TO PREVENT HARMS
TO THEMSELVES OR THE PUBLIC.
RIGHT TO ORGANIZE. WORKERS
SHOULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO
ORGANIZE AND BARGAIN AROUND NEW
TECHNOLOGIES. EDUCATION WORKERS
SHOULD HAVE A FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT
TO EDUCATION AND TRAINING SO
THAT THEY CAN ADAPT TO CHANGES
IN THEIR JOBS. ACCOUNTABILITY AI
AND OTHER DIGITAL TECH SHOULD BE
TESTED FOR A BROAD SET OF HARMS
BEFORE ITS USE, INCLUDING
DISCRIMINATION. DE-SKILLING
HEALTH AND SAFETY HARMS AND JOB
LOSS. AND FINALLY, ENFORCEMENT.
GOVERNMENT AGENCIES SHOULD PLAY
A CENTRAL ROLE IN HOLDING
EMPLOYERS RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY
HARMS CAUSED BY DIGITAL TECH,
AND WORKERS SHOULD BE ABLE TO
SUE FOR VIOLATIONS. SO THAT IS
JUST TO GIVE YOU SOME FLAVOR OF
THE TYPES OF CONCEPTS THAT
WORKER ADVOCATES AND UNIONS HAVE
DEVELOPED. A FINAL POINT BEFORE
I CLOSE, AND THAT IS THAT LABOR
STANDARDS ARE ABSOLUTELY
CRITICAL, BUT BY THEMSELVES ARE
NOT ENOUGH. AND ULTIMATELY, AND
YOU WILL HEAR THIS FROM OTHERS,
WORKERS NEED TO BE AND SHOULD
FULLY PARTICIPATE IN DECISIONS
OVER WHICH TECHNOLOGIES ARE
DEVELOPED, HOW THEY ARE USED IN
THE WORKPLACE, AND HOW THE
RESULTING PRODUCTIVITY GAINS ARE
SHARED. THIS PARTICIPATION DOES
NOT AND SHOULD NOT BE NEED TO BE
ANTI-INNOVATION BECAUSE WORKERS
HAVE A WEALTH OF KNOWLEDGE AND
EXPERIENCE TO BRING TO THE
TABLE. I TRULY BELIEVE, I THINK
LIKE YOU, ALL THAT
DEHUMANIZATION AND AUTOMATION
ARE NOT THE ONLY PATH WITH
WORKERS AT THE TABLE. AI AND
OTHER DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES CAN
BE PUT IN THE SERVICE OF
CREATING A VIBRANT AND
PRODUCTIVE ECONOMY THAT IS BUILT
ON LIVING WAGE JOBS, SAFE
WORKPLACES, AND RACE AND GENDER
EQUITY. SO THANK YOU AGAIN FOR
THIS OPPORTUNITY AND I AM HAPPY
TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. WE WILL
DEFINITELY HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY
FOR QUESTIONS. I WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT OUR NEXT PANELIST
GOES, AND THEN WE'LL OPEN IT UP
FOR QUESTIONS OF THE MEMBERS. SO
SARA FLOCKS, THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIRS AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEE SARA FLOCKS. I'M FROM
THE, CALIFORNIA LABOR FEDERATION.
AND I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU
FOR HAVING THIS VERY, VERY
IMPORTANT AND TIMELY HEARING, IN
THE FALL, THE LABOR FEDERATION
CONVENED A NUMBER OF OUR UNIONS
ON THE TOPIC OF AI AND
TECHNOLOGY, AND WE HAD A DAY
LONG SESSION WITH MEMBERS FROM
ACTORS, WRITERS, JANITORS,
REALLY, EVERY PERSON WHO IS A
UNION MEMBER IN CALIFORNIA AND
PUT TOGETHER OUR PRINCIPLES,
WHICH ARE LABORS PRINCIPLES ON
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE,
AUTOMATION AND TECHNOLOGY IN THE
WORKPLACE. AND THAT I'VE MADE
THAT AVAILABLE TO THE MEMBERS OF
THE COMMITTEE HERE. AND, ANITA
AND I HAVE CLEARLY BEEN WORKING
TOGETHER FOR A LONG TIME BECAUSE
SHE SAID, WE HAVE TWO PATHS TO
GO ON AND I HAVE IN MY NOTES. WE
ARE AT A CROSSROADS AND WE
REALLY ARE. SHE SAID THAT THERE
ARE TWO CHOICES RIGHT NOW WITH
TECHNOLOGY. WE CAN GO DOWN THE
DYSTOPIAN PATH OR WE CAN GO DOWN
THE PATH WHERE THE GAINS OF
TECHNOLOGY CAN BE BROADLY AND
EQUITABLY SHARED. SO I AM
ACTUALLY GOING TO GO DOWN THE
DYSTOPIAN PATH BECAUSE WE HAVE A
HISTORY OF THAT IN THIS COUNTRY
AND IN THIS WORLD. AND I THINK
THERE ARE SOME LESSONS THAT WE
CAN TAKE FROM THAT OF WHAT TO
AVOID. AND SO I'M GOING TO GO
WAY BACK, LIKE WAY BACK TO 1811,
WHEN TEXTILE EMPLOYERS
INTRODUCED THE MECHANIZED LOOM
AND KNITTING MACHINES, INTO THE
TEXTILE INDUSTRY IN ENGLAND, AND
IT GAVE RISE TO THE LUDDITE
MOVEMENT. AND I'M GOING TO GIVE
A SHOUT OUT RIGHT HERE TO BRIAN
MERCHANT, WHO IS THE AUTHOR OF
BLOOD IN THE MACHINE, FOR GOING
INTO THIS HISTORY. WE ACTUALLY
HAD HIM SPEAK TO OUR MEMBERS AND
LEARNED A LOT FROM THIS. AND SO
LUDDITES GET A BAD RAP AS BEING
ANTI-TECHNOLOGY. I'VE BEEN
CALLED A LUDDITE BECAUSE I
WOULDN'T GIVE UP MY BLACKBERRY,
BUT REALLY THEY WERE NOT
ANTI-TECHNOLOGY AT ALL. WHAT
THEY WERE AGAINST WAS EMPLOYERS
USING MACHINES TO UNDERMINE
BASIC LABOR STANDARDS. THESE
WERE SKILLED CRAFT PEOPLE WHO
WANTED TO SEE APPRENTICES
BECAUSE THEY HAD AN
APPRENTICESHIP PROGRAM, BE THE
ONES WHO WERE TRAINED TO USE
THESE MACHINES. THEY WANTED TO
HAVE DECENT PAY. THEY WANTED
CONTROL OVER THEIR HOURS. THEY
WANTED THEIR PENSIONS. THEY
WANTED TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A
FAMILY SUPPORTING WAGE AND
CONTROL OVER THEIR WORK.
EMPLOYERS WERE NOT USING
MACHINES. THIS WAY. THEY PUT THE
LOOMS INTO FACTORIES THAT REALLY
GAVE BIRTH TO THE MODERN
SWEATSHOP. THEY GAVE BIRTH TO
DANGEROUS, DIRTY FACTORIES WHERE
CHILD LABOR WAS USED, WHERE
WORKERS WERE INJURED BECAUSE
THERE WEREN'T SAFETY PRECAUTIONS
OR TRAINING. AND SO THAT IS THE
REASON LUDDITES SMASHED
MACHINES, IS BECAUSE THE
EMPLOYERS WOULD NOT LISTEN TO
THEIR DEMANDS AND THEY WOULDN'T
NEGOTIATE WITH THEM. AND GOING A
STEP FURTHER, EMPLOYERS DECIDED
TO MAKE IT A CAPITAL OFFENSE TO
SMASH THE MACHINES. AND SO WITH
THAT, THEY DESTROYED THE LUDDITE
MOVEMENT. AND WE HAVE LIVED WITH
THOSE CONSEQUENCES FOR DECADES
AND DECADES. AND IT HAS TAKEN US
BLOOD, SWEAT AND TEARS TO GET A
BAN ON CHILD LABOR, TO ELIMINATE
SWEATSHOP LABOR, TO GET A
MINIMUM WAGE AND A WEEKEND. ALL
OF THAT WAS FOUGHT FOR BECAUSE
THERE WAS NOT REGULATION, WHEN A
LOT OF THESE TOOLS WERE
INTRODUCED INTO THE WORKPLACE
BACK IN 1811 OR BACK IN WHATEVER
PERIOD WHERE TECHNOLOGY WAS
BROUGHT INTO THE WORKPLACE. SO
TECHNOLOGY IS NOTHING NEW AND
UNREGULATED. TECHNOLOGY IS
NOTHING Dð. HOWEVER, AI ENABLED
TECHNOLOGY POSES A WHOLE HOST OF
NEW CHALLENGES THAT I THINK IT'S
VERY IMPORTANT FOR POLICYMAKERS
AND UNIONS AND UNION MEMBERS TO
UNDERSTAND SO THAT WE'RE ABLE TO
SIT AT THE TABLE AND BARGAIN FOR
THE RIGHT THINGS, AND THAT THE
IMPORTANT GUARDRAILS ARE PUT IN
PLACE BECAUSE THE GUARDRAILS AND
STANDARDS THAT ANITA TALKED
ABOUT, THEY'RE BASICALLY WHAT
THE LUDDITES DEMANDED IN 1811.
AND SO THE FOUNDATION IS ALREADY
THERE. WE JUST HAVE TO ADJUST
FOR SOME OF THE CHANGES. SO ONE
OF THE MAJOR CHANGES IS THE
RAPID ADVANCEMENT AND THE
CORPORATE INVESTMENT IN AI
TECHNOLOGIES. WHO KNEW ABOUT AI
FIVE YEARS AGO LIKE IT IS
ADVANCING AT A RAPID PACE,
ALMOST TOO FAST FOR US TO
UNDERSTAND. AND IT'S NOT A LOOM.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE CAN TOUCH.
IT'S AN ALGORITHM. IT'S A BLACK
BOX WHERE WE DON'T NECESSARILY
WANT KNOW WHAT GOES IN, AND WE
CAN'T RIGHT NOW TAKE IT APART,
AND SO THAT IS A REAL CHALLENGE.
THE OTHER THING IS, IS THAT WE
SAY OR WE THINK THAT TECHNOLOGY
IS NEUTRAL, BUT IT'S NOT
NECESSARILY BECAUSE LOOK AT WHO
IS DEVELOPING AND PRODUCING IT.
CORPORATE GIANTS LIKE MCDONALD'S,
WALMART, AMAZON ARE INVESTING
BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF DOLLARS
INTO THIS TECHNOLOGY. SO THAT
THEY CAN DO WORKPLACE
SURVEILLANCE SO THAT THEY CAN
MAXIMIZE PRODUCTIVITY AND CUT
LABOR COSTS. THAT IS HOW THE
TECHNOLOGY IS BEING DEVELOPED
FOR THAT PURPOSE. WE ALSO HAVE
VC, VENTURE CAPITAL, WHO IS
INVESTING? I THINK IT'S $290
BILLION INTO AI TECHNOLOGY OVER
THE LAST FIVE YEARS TO DEVELOP
THINGS THAT THEY CAN MAKE MONEY
OFF OF, NOT NECESSARILY THAT
MAKES WORK SAFER OR MORE
PRODUCTIVE OR BENEFICIAL FOR
WORKERS. SO WE NEED TO NOT JUST
THINK ABOUT HOW TECHNOLOGY IS
DEPLOYED, BUT HOW IT'S
DEVELOPED. AND WHAT ARE WE
INVESTING IN? THE DEVELOPMENT OF
TECHNOLOGY THAT IS FOR WORKERS
AND THAT THAT IS A PIECE THERE
THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. IT'S
SOMETHING THAT THE NATIONAL AFL
HAS LOOKED AT AS WELL IN. HOW DO
WE UNDERSTAND WHAT TECHNOLOGY
CAN WE DEVELOP THAT HELPS
NURSES, THAT HELPS DOCTORS, THAT
HELPS MAKE, YOU KNOW, HOUSE
HOTEL HOUSEKEEPERS, JOBS LESS
BACKBREAKING? THE SECOND PIECE
IS THAT AI AND THE DATA THAT
ENABLES AI HAS SUPERCHARGED
EXISTING EXPLOITATION AND WORKER
SURVEILLANCE. AND SO WHILE
CAMERAS AND, YOU KNOW, BOSSES
TRYING TO SPY ON WORKERS HAS
ALWAYS EXISTED, THE ABILITY TO
COLLECT DATA HAS JUST TAKEN OFF.
WHEN BOSSES CAN TRACK YOUR EYE
MOVEMENTS, WHEN THEY CAN USE
SOFTWARE TO KNOW WHEN YOU'RE
TYPING, WHEN YOU'RE CLICKING ON
YOUR MOUSE, WHEN THEY CAN USE
ALL OF YOUR DATA TO DO
PREDICTIVE BEHAVIORAL ANALYSIS
THAT ANITA POINTED TO, WHERE
THEY WHEN THEY'RE HIRING OR
LOOKING AT A WORKFORCE, THEY ARE
AS TECHNOLOGY WHERE THEY CAN
SAY, IS THIS PERSON? ARE THEY
LIKELY TO FILE A WAGE COMPLAINT?
ARE THEY LIKELY TO UNIONIZE? IN
FACT, THERE IS TECHNOLOGY THAT
EXISTS, AND I HAVE A LIST OF IT
PERCEPTICS, WHICH IS USED BY 30%
OF FORTUNE 100 COMPANIES. THEY
HAVE SOMETHING CALLED A UNION
VULNERABILITY INDEX THAT CAN
RATE HOW VULNERABLE WORKERS ARE
FROM JUST DATA THEY COLLECT TO
JOINING A UNION, WORKPLACE BY
FACEBOOK IS ALLOWS EMPLOYERS TO
SUPPRESS AND MONITOR THE TERM
UNIONIZATION AND CHATS BETWEEN
WORKERS. HUMANIZE. I REALLY
CAN'T BELIEVE IT'S CALLED
HUMANIZE. IT MONITORS WORKPLACE
CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN WORKERS
AND TERAMIND TRACKS THE WRITTEN
COMMUNICATIONS AND TRIGGERS
NOTICES TO BOSSES WHEN KEYWORDS
ARE USED, SUCH AS UNIONIZATION,
UNIONIZATION, AND THERE'S A
WHOLE BUNCH MORE. ALL OF THESE
ARE SPELLED INCORRECTLY. IT'S
HUMANIZED WITH A Y, JUST LIKE
TECH LIKES TO DO. THERE'S ALSO
ORACLE RETAIL XBRI THAT MONITORS
CASHIERS DAILY AND DOES A HIGH
RISK ASSESSMENT OF WHO'S MOST
LIKELY TO STEAL. ALL OF THIS IS
IN A BLACK BOX. WE DON'T KNOW
WHAT'S GOING INTO THIS BOX TO
FIGURE OUT WHICH WORKER IS HIGH
RISK. SO THE MONITORING AND THEN
ALGORITHMIC MANAGEMENT WHERE
THERE IS A HAPTIC, SYSTEM THAT
AMAZON USES. SO IF YOU'RE IN A
WAREHOUSE, THEY BUZZ YOUR ARM TO
MOVE. SO YOU'RE THE MOST
EFFICIENT YOU CAN BE. IT'S LIKE
SCIENTIFIC MANAGEMENT AS IF YOU
WERE LIKE A ROBOCOP. THIS
ELIMINATES ANY MICRO BREAKS, ANY
MOMENTS THAT WORKERS WOULD BE
ABLE TO REST THE RATE OF INJURY
IN AMAZON WAREHOUSES IS
EXTRAORDINARY BECAUSE THEY ARE.
THEY ARE BASICALLY TREATING
WORKERS LIKE ROBOTS, AND THEY
HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY TO
SUPERCHARGE THAT. SO THERE'S I
HAVE SO MANY MORE EXAMPLES, BUT
I KNOW I THINK I'M AT TIME. SO I
WILL ALSO SAY PERVASIVENESS.
THIS TECHNOLOGY IS EVERYWHERE. I
HAVE NEVER HAD AN ISSUE WHERE
LITERALLY EVERY WORKER IS
IMPACTED, ONES THAT I'M
SURPRISED IT IS EVERYWHERE. IT
IS TOUCHING EVERYONE IN ALL
DIFFERENT WAYS. AND IT'S NOT
ONLY AN IMPACT ON WORKERS, BUT
IT'S ON THE PUBLIC. THE PEOPLE
THEY SERVE PATIENTS EVERY ONE OF
US WHO WALKS INTO A GROCERY
STORE AND HAS ALL OF OUR DATA
COLLECTED AND OUR RETINA SCAN TO
SEE, DO WE LOOK AT ICE CREAM FOR
TOO LONG? THAT MEANS WE GET ADS
ABOUT IT. AND SO THE
PERVASIVENESS IN OUR LIVES, AND
YET HOW INVISIBLE IT IS AND HOW
LITTLE WE UNDERSTAND, POSES NEW
AND UNIQUE CHALLENGES. SO WE
HAVE A CHOICE. LIKE ANITA SAID.
AND I WOULD URGE THE
POLICYMAKERS HERE TO BE SMART,
STRATEGIC, AND, VERY THOROUGH IN
THE REGULATION OF TECHNOLOGY AS
IT'S DEVELOPED AND DEPLOYED. AND
YOU HAVE SUCH A GREAT PANEL,
YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM SO
MANY UNION MEMBERS WHO HAVE
EXPERIENCE AND WHO'VE BARGAINED
THIS. THERE'S A LOT OF GREAT
EXAMPLES IN COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING. SO AGAIN, JUST THANK
YOU SO MUCH FOR THIS HEARING AND
THIS OPPORTUNITY. THANK YOU. I
WILL NOW HAND IT OVER TO THE
MEMBERS. I HAVE QUESTIONS, BUT
IF OTHER MEMBERS HAVE QUESTIONS,
NO OKAY. ANY ACTUALLY I'LL WAIT
BECAUSE ONE OF MY QUESTIONS WAS
GOING TO BE AROUND EXAMPLES OF
THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING. SO
THAT'S THE NEXT PANEL. ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, DOCTOR
BERNARD, WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON
TO OUR PANEL. NUMBER TWO. SO WE
HAVE, NYU PROFESSOR SHULMAN, WHO
I BELIEVE IS GOING TO ALSO BE
REMOTELY ROSALBA ARCINIEGA, A
JANITOR WITH SEIU, US, WW, AS
WELL AS HER TRANSLATOR, UCLA
PROFESSOR, CHRIS TILLY, WHO'S
ALSO GOING TO BE REMOTELY. SO
ARE WE GOING TO HAVE BOTH OF
THEM ON THE SCREEN OR THEY'RE
GOING TO TAKE TURNS? OKAY, ZACH
GAINOR, CAMPAIGN RESEARCHER FOR
UFCW LOCAL FIVE, CHRIS NIELSEN,
DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH FOR THE
CALIFORNIA NURSES ASSOCIATION.
SO THIS IS A PRETTY BIG PANEL,
WE'RE GOING TO, LIMIT IT TO SIX
MINUTES FOR EACH PANELIST. AND
THEN AGAIN, ONCE EVERYONE IS
DONE, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO OUR
MEMBERS FOR QUESTIONS, WE WILL
START WITH, PROFESSOR SHULMAN.
YES YES. HI, EVERYONE, THANK YOU
SO MUCH, FOR HAVING ME. LET ME
KNOW IF YOU CAN, HEAR ME WELL.
OR SEE MY OWN THUMBS, YES, I
IT'S GOOD. PERFECT. WONDERFUL
GREAT, SO, HELLO FROM NEW YORK,
SO MY NAME IS HILKE SCHELLMANN.
I'M AN EMMY AWARD WINNING
INVESTIGATIVE REPORTER AND
ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF
JOURNALISM AT NYU. AND FOR MOST
OF MY PROFESSIONAL LIFE, I'VE
WORKED AT THE WALL STREET
JOURNAL, SPEAKING TO YOU TODAY
BECAUSE OVER THE PAST SEVEN
YEARS, I'VE BEEN REPORTING ON
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND
HIRING. I WROTE COUNTLESS
ARTICLES AND RECENTLY PUBLISHED
A BOOK ON THE TOPIC. I'VE TALKED
TO OVER 200 JOB SEEKERS, EXPERTS
Ã HR MANAGERS, RECRUITERS,
HIRING MANAGERS, PSYCHOLOGISTS,
LAWYERS, BASICALLY EVERYONE AND
ANYONE WHO HAS WITNESSED HOW AI
HAS FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGED THE
WORLD OF HIRING. AND I WANTED TO
THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR INTEREST
IN THIS, I THINK URGENT TOPIC,
AND I WANTED TO SHARE WHAT I
FOUND OUT, SO FIRST OF ALL, THE
USE OF AI IN HIRING IS
WIDESPREAD BUT UNDERREPORTED. SO
APPROXIMATELY 97% OF FORTUNE 500
COMPANIES USE ALGORITHMS IN
THEIR HIRING FUNNEL FROM
CHECKING AND REJECTING RESUMES
TO VIDEO INTERVIEWS TO AI
POWERED BACKGROUND CHECKS,
ALMOST ALL APPLICANT TRACKING
SYSTEMS THAT MANY MID-SIZE AND
LARGE COMPANIES USE TO TRACK JOB
SEEKERS, LIKE WHERE THEY ARE IN
THE HIRING PHASE, HAVE AI NOW
BUILT IN JOB PLATFORMS LIKE
LINKEDIN AND INDEED AND OTHERS?
ALSO HAVE AI BUILT IN, AND NO
ONE IS CHECKING IF THE WAY
THEY'RE USING IT IS LEADING TO
DISCRIMINATION. IN 2021, THE CEO
OF THE JOB PLATFORM
ZIPRECRUITER, IAN SIEGEL, TOLD
ME THAT BETWEEN 75 TO 100% OF
RESUMES ARE CURRENTLY CHECKED BY
AI, NOTING THAT THAT IS THREE
YEARS AGO. IT'S PROBABLY MORE
NOW. COMPANIES USE AI TOOLS
BECAUSE MANY GET THOUSANDS OR
EVEN MILLIONS OF APPLICATIONS
PER YEAR SINCE THE DAWN OF JOB
PLATFORMS. AGAIN, LIKE INDEED IN
LINKEDIN, MADE IT MUCH, MUCH
EASIER FOR JOB APPLICANTS TO
APPLY TO OPEN POSITIONS WITH THE
MOUSE CLICK. SO ON THE SIDE OF
THE COMPANIES, THEY SAY THEY'RE
INUNDATED BY RESUMES AND DO NOT
HAVE ENOUGH CAPACITY TO CHECK
ALL OF THEM. GOOGLE FOR EXAMPLE,
GETS AROUND 3 MILLION
APPLICATIONS A YEAR. IBM AROUND
5 MILLION. GOLDMAN SACHS GOT
OVER 220,000 APPLICATIONS FOR
THEIR SUMMER INTERNSHIP PROGRAM
ALONE, AND ALSO AI IS USED IN
ONE WAY VIDEO INTERVIEWS IN
WHICH CANDIDATES RECORD
THEMSELVES ANSWERING QUESTIONS
WITH NO HUMANS ON THE OTHER SIDE
AND ONE OF THE LEADERS IN ONE
WAY VIDEO COMPANY. INTERVIEWING
DOES ABOUT 100,000 OR SO VIDEO
INTERVIEWS EVERY DAY. MOST JOB
SEEKERS I'VE SPOKEN TO DIDN'T
KNOW THAT I WAS BEING USED ON
THEM. AND EVEN IF THEY KNEW,
THEY SAID IF THEY, YOU KNOW,
THEY REALLY WANTED THE JOB. SO
MOST OF THEM WOULD HAVE NOT
OPTED OUT OF THE AI SCREEN. AND
HERE ARE SOME OF THE PROBLEMS I
FOUND WITH THE DIFFERENT
TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE BEING
USED. SO AI IS PITCHED BY THE
COMPANIES AS THE GREAT EQUALIZER
AND HIRING ONE OBJECTIVE
ALGORITHM MEASURES THEM ALL
WITHOUT BIAS. SO I WAS HOPING TO
FIND EVIDENCE OF THIS, BUT WHAT
I FOUND IS A LITTLE LESS
HOPEFUL. FOR EXAMPLE, I SPOKE TO
THREE EMPLOYMENT ATTORNEYS AND
ONE PSYCHOLOGIST WHO GOT ACCESS
TO LOOK INTO DIFFERENT BLACK
BOXES OR RESUME SCREENERS. THEY
TOLD ME THAT THEY FOUND PROBLEMS
IN MANY OF THE TOOLS THEY WERE
ASKED TO CHECK. SOME TOOLS USED
FIRST NAMES LIKE THOMAS AS
INDICATORS OF SUCCESS, WHICH
MEANS THAT JOB SEEKERS WHO HAD
THE WORD THOMAS ON THEIR RESUMES
GOT MORE POINTS, WHICH OBVIOUSLY
HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH SOMEONE'S
QUALIFICATIONS FOR A JOB. EVEN
MORE PROBLEMATIC KEYWORDS FOR
SYRIA AND CANADA, WHICH MAY LEAD
TO DISCRIMINATION BASED ON
NATIONAL ORIGIN. ANOTHER TOOL
GAVE MORE POINTS TO CANDIDATES
WITH THE WORD BASEBALL ON THEIR
RESUMES, AND FEWER POINTS TO
CANDIDATES WITH THE WORD
SOFTBALL ON THEIR RESUME. MACE,
WHICH INDICATES GENDER
DISCRIMINATION IN THE US.
ANOTHER TOOL USED THE WORDS,
AFRICA AND AFRICAN AMERICAN,
WHICH INDICATES DISCRIMINATION
BASED ON RACE. THESE TYPE OF AI
TOOLS OFTEN GO UNCHECKED BECAUSE
HR DEPARTMENTS BUY THEM TO SAVE
MONEY, AND DO NOT WANT TO HIRE
MORE PEOPLE TO OVERSEE THESE
TOOLS. ALSO, YOU KNOW, SOME
COMPANY EXECUTIVES HAVE TOLD ME
THAT THEY'RE NOT CHECKING THESE
SYSTEMS, SO THEY WILL HAVE
PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY IF THERE'S
LITIGATION. AI IS ALSO BEING
USED IN VIDEO GAMES FOR HIRING,
AND ONE EMPLOYMENT LAWYER TOLD
ME THAT A TOOL HE TESTED KEPT
DISCRIMINATING AGAINST FEMALE
APPLICANTS. THE STARTUP THAT
BUILT THE VIDEO GAME SUITE IS
STILL SELLING THE SAME TOOL AND
HAS EVEN GROWN. I PLAYED SOME OF
THESE GAMES AS WELL, AND IN ONE
GAME I HAD TO HIT THE SPACEBAR
AS FAST AS POSSIBLE, YOU KNOW,
WHILE I WAS DOING THAT, I WAS
WONDERING, WHAT DOES I HAVE TO
DO WITH THE JOB? BUT ALSO, WHAT
WOULD HAPPEN IF AN APPLICANT HAS
A MOTOR DISABILITY? WOULD THEY
BE REJECTED BY THE AI BECAUSE
THEY COULDN'T HIT THE SPACEBAR
AS FAST AS I COULD? IS THAT FAIR,
I REPORTED IN 2018 FOR THE WALL
STREET JOURNAL THAT SOME OF THE
LARGEST VIDEO INTERVIEW
COMPANIES USED AI THAT SCANNED
THE FACIAL EXPRESSIONS OF JOB
SEEKERS. IT TURNS OUT THERE'S NO
SCIENCE OF WHAT FACIAL
EXPRESSIONS WE NEED FOR A GIVEN
JOB. AND THERE'S NO SCIENCE FOR
FACIAL EXPRESSIONS IN JOB
INTERVIEWS THAT PREDICT SUCCESS
IN A JOB, AND WE SEE THIS AGAIN.
AND AGAIN THAT WE USE
TECHNOLOGY, NOT BASED ON
SCIENCE, LUCKILY, PUBLIC
PRESSURE HAD GOTTEN TO THE
COMPANY AND THEY STOPPED USING
THE TOOLS. BUT OTHER COMPANIES
STILL USE IT, AI IS ALSO USED IN
BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR
EMPLOYMENT. SOME TOOLS ANALYZE
SOCIAL MEDIA FEEDS OF
CANDIDATES. AND THIS BROAD KIND
OF A BROAD KIND OF ANALYSIS
COULD FIND PROTECTED EVIDENCE OF
UNION ORGANIZING AMONGST WORKERS,
AS I SAID, I'VE ALSO TESTED SOME
OF THESE TOOLS MYSELF, ONE THAT
WAS SUPPOSED TO FIND OUT HOW
WELL I SPEAK ENGLISH, I ACTUALLY
SPOKE TO IT IN GERMAN, WHICH IS
MY NATIVE LANGUAGE, AND I GOT A
SIX OUT OF NINE ENGLISH
COMPETENCE SCORE. SO THAT WAS
INTERESTING, SO I TALKED TO THE
DEVELOPERS OF THIS, AND, YOU
KNOW, A LOT OF THEM WHO BUILT
THESE TOOLS DON'T KNOW
THEMSELVES WHAT EXACTLY THEIR
TOOLS ARE DOING. AND I THINK
THAT STRIKES ME AS VERY
PROBLEMATIC IF THE PEOPLE WHO
BUILT THE TECHNOLOGY DON'T KNOW
WHAT THE TECHNOLOGY DOES. AND
FOLKS IN THE, IN THE INDUSTRY
ACTUALLY CALL, CALL ALL THIS,
THE WILD WEST, AND, YOU KNOW,
JUST TO SUM IT ALL UP, LIKE THE
EEOC AND OTHER ENFORCEMENT
AGENCIES HAD TO HAVE A HARD TIME
CHECKING THESE TOOLS BECAUSE
THEY THEY WORK BASED ON
COMPLAINTS FROM JOB SEEKERS. BUT
SINCE MOST JOB SEEKERS DON'T
KNOW WHAT IS BEING DONE TO THEM,
THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW YOU KNOW,
THEY DON'T EVEN KNOW AI IS BEING
USED ON THEM, LET ALONE THAT
THEY MAY HAVE BEEN HARMED. THERE
ARE VERY FEW COMPLAINTS, SO I
BELIEVE URGENT ACTION IS
NECESSARY SINCE WE KNOW THAT
THERE ARE PROBLEMS, ESPECIALLY
FOR PEOPLE FROM ALREADY
MARGINALIZED GROUPS AND PEOPLE
WITH DISABILITIES WHO ARE NOT
BEING CONSIDERED WHEN ONE SIZE
FITS ALL TOOLS ARE BEING BUILT.
I BELIEVE FAIRNESS AND ACCESS TO
THE LABOR MARKET BASED ON MERIT
IS AT STAKE HERE. WE NEED
TRANSPARENCY, EXPLAINABILITY AND
MORE RESEARCH. THANK YOU FOR
YOUR TIME AND I'M OF COURSE
HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR
GIVE ANYONE MORE INFORMATION.
OKAY ROSALBA, YES. SI PUEDEN
PASAR Y ASAMBLEÍSTA. GRACIAS POR
LA OPORTUNIDAD DE ESTA.
IMPORTANT COMMITTEE IS AN HONOR
PARA ME. MY NAME IS ROSALBA.
TENGO DO YOU TURN IT OFF? I'M
SORRY. OKAY OKAY. THANK YOU.
PRESIDENT ASAMBLEÍSTA. GRACIAS
POR LA OPORTUNIDAD DE TÊ
ESPECÍFICAMENTE ESTÁ IMPORTANT
COMMITTEE ES UN HONOR PARA ME ME
NOMBRE ES ROSALBA. TENGO OAN S¼
ANOS EN LA INDUSTRIA DE
LIMPIEZA. GRAN PARTE DE MI
CARRERA ESTA EN ESTA INDUSTRIA E
TRABAJADO EN LAS CIUDADES A
NIVEL CALIFORNIA HACIENDO LA
LIMPIEZA EN UNA DE LAS EMPRESAS
TECNOLOGICAS MAS GRANDES Y MAS
IMPORTANTES DEL MUNDO. SOY
ORIGINARIO DE MÉXICO, MI FAMILIA
AMIGO A ESTE PAIS BUSCANDO LA
REUNIFICATION. FAMILIA ME SIENTO
MUY ORGULLOSA DE SER MUJER
MIGRANT Y DE SER JANITOR CON UN
CON UNION A LA UNION. ES Â HIÂU
US WW EL USO DE LA DE LA
INTELIGENCIA ARTIFICIAL EN LA
INDUSTRIA DEL LIMPIEZA SIEMPRE A
BENEFICIADO A MAS A LAS A LAS
COMPANIAS QUÊ NOSOTROS COMO
SANITARIOS POR MAS DE DIEZ ANOS
PARA PODER POR LA ENTRADA Y
SALIDA, TENIA QUÊ BAJAR UNA
APPLICATION ON ME. TELÉFONO
CELULAR PERSONAL LA EMPRESA NOS
DABA CUATRO DOLARES MAS COMO
BOLSO, HABIA DÍAS C¯ EL CELULAR
NO FUNCIONABA O COMPANEROS QUÊ
NO LES NO LES GUSTA EL DINERO
PARA PAGAR. ESE MAS Â NOS
TOCABA SUFRIR TRATANDO DE
EXPLICAR AL SUPERVISOR PORQUE NO
PODRIAMOS PLANCHA. AHORA VEO C¯
EN EL VALLE DE SILICON AI ROBOTS
POR TODO LADOS AND RESTAURANTES
Y OTRAS INDUSTRIAS S¼ QUÊ LA
INTELIGENCIA ARTIFICIAL. YA ES
UNA REALIDAD ES CUESTION DE
TIEMPO PARA C¯ MAS Y MAS IMPACT
LA INDUSTRIA DE LA LIMPIEZA SIC
YA I JANITORIAL ROBOTS DISENADOS
POR LAS MISMAS EMPRESAS
MILENARIAS QUÊ RAMOS ES
INCREIBLE C¯ LAS GRANDES
EMPRESAS IN MILLIONS AND
MILLIONS Y MILLONES DE DOLARES
IN DESARROLLAR INTELIGENCIA
ARTIFICIAL Y CADA VEZ C¯ PEDIMOS
MEJOR SALARIO SIEMPRE HAY
PRE-TEXTOS PARA NØ PAGANOS UN
SUELDO DIGNO A LA INDUSTRIA DE
LA LIMPIEZA DEPENDE DE LA
EXPLOTACION DE LAS TRABAJADORES
DE LA LIMPIEZA EN SU MAYORIA
SOMOS MUJERES IMMIGRANTS, LAS
QUÊ LIMPIA COMO JANITORIAL Y
MUJER IMMIGRANT CON ANOS DE
EXPERIENCIA EN ESTA INDUSTRIA,
PUEDO A TESTIGO SOBRE LA
SOBRECARGA DE TRABAJO Y LO
AGOTADO DE NUESTRA LABOR. MUCHOS
DE MIS COMPANEROS DE TRABAJO EN
ESTA INDUSTRIA DEPENDEN DE
MEDICAMENTOS PARA EL DOLOR PARA
ALIVIAR LAS SANCIONES DEL
TRABAJO Y ALGUNOS INCLUSO HAN
SIDO SOMETIDOS A LA POR
LECCIONES C¯ PERSISTEN. AND A
PESAR DE LA INTERVENCION MÉDICA,
A PESAR DE ESTO DESAFIO DE A
PESAR DE ESTOS DESAFIOS SEGUIMOS
TRABAJANDO INCONSOLABLY PARA
MANTENER LA LIMPIEZA DE LA DE
LOS EDIFICIOS, MAS PRESTIGIOUS,
A MENUDO CON UN GRAN SACRIFICIO
PERSONAL. YO NO ESTOY EN CONTRA
DE LA INTELIGENCIA ARTIFICIAL.
QUÉ BUENO, QUÉ SE èC? PERO
IMPORTANTE C¯ LA INTELIGENCIA
ARTIFICIAL. NO SEA UTILIZADA
PARA DISPLACER AL TRABAJADOR DE
LA LIMPIEZA. LA TECNOLOGIA DEBE
SER EL PUEBLO DEBE ACABAR CON LA
EXPLOITATION Y LA CARGA LABORAL.
LA INTELIGENCIA ARTIFICIAL. YA
ESTA AQUI. ESTA ES LA
OPORTUNIDAD PARA C¯ LA
TECNOLOGIA PUEDA DARLE LA
OPORTUNIDAD DE LOS EDITORES DE
PROGRAMA DE PROGRAMMER ROBOTS DE
LA OPORTUNIDAD DE CRECIMIENTO EN
LA INDUSTRIA Y DE GARANTIZAR
TRABAJOS BIEN REUNIRSE DONDE
DECIAMOS TRATADOS CON RESPECTO Y
DIGNIDAD. LA INTELIGENCIA
ARTIFICIAL NO PUEDE HACER EL
TRABAJO DE UN HUMANO. NO HACE
MUCHO TIEMPO EN MEDIO DE LA
PANDEMIA. MAS HORRIBLE EN LA
HISTORIA DE NUESTROS ESPECIES. A
SPECIAL UMANA, LOS RICOS DECIAN
GALGIANI CARILLO SEREMOS
ESENCIALES AHORA LOS RICOS
QUIEREN UTILIZAR LA TECNOLOGIA
COMO PARA RETIRADOS DE TRABAJAR.
Y ESO NO SE VALE. GRACIAS THANK
YOU. I WILL BE TRANSLATING FOR
ROSALBA. I WANT TO CLARIFY. I
CANNOT TRANSLATE FOR HER, BUT I
CAN READ ENGLISH, SO I
APPRECIATE CHAIR ORTEGA ALSO
OFFERING HER STAFFORD FOR IF
THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS. SO, THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIRS AND MEMBERS,
FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY
BEFORE THIS IMPORTANT COMMITTEE.
IT IS AN HONOR FOR ME, MY NAME
IS ROSALBA. I HAVE 11 YEARS OF
EXPERIENCE IN THE CLEANING
INDUSTRY. FOR MUCH OF MY CAREER
IN THIS INDUSTRY, I HAVE WORKED
IN THE CITY OF SUNNYVALE,
CLEANING AT ONE OF THE LARGEST
TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES IN THE
WORLD. I AM ORIGINALLY FROM
MEXICO. MY FAMILY EMIGRATED TO
THIS COUNTRY SEEKING FAMILY
REUNIFICATION. I FEEL VERY PROUD
TO BE A MIGRANT WOMAN AND TO BE
A JANITOR WITH A UNION. MY UNION
IS SEIU USA. THE USE OF
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN THE
CLEANING INDUSTRY HAS ALWAYS
BENEFITED COMPANIES MORE THAN US
JANITORS. FOR MORE THAN TEN
YEARS, TO BE ABLE TO PUNCH IN
AND OUT, I HAD TO DOWNLOAD AN
APPLICATION ON MY PERSONAL CELL
PHONE. THE COMPANY GAVE US $4 A
MONTH AS REIMBURSEMENT. THERE
WERE DAYS WHEN THE CELL PHONE
DIDN'T WORK, OR COLLEAGUES
DIDN'T HAVE THE MONEY TO PAY FOR
IT THAT MONTH, AND WE HAD TO
SUFFER. TRYING TO EXPLAIN TO THE
SUPERVISOR WHY WE COULDN'T CLOCK
IN. NOW I SEE THAT IN SILICON
VALLEY THERE ARE ROBOTS
EVERYWHERE IN RESTAURANTS AND
OTHER INDUSTRIES. I KNOW THAT
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS
ALREADY A REALITY, AND IT IS A
MATTER OF TIME BEFORE IT IMPACTS
THE CLEANING INDUSTRY MORE AND
MORE. I KNOW THERE ARE ALREADY
ROBOT JANITORS DESIGNED BY THE
SAME MILLION DOLLAR COMPANIES
THAT WE CLEAN. IT IS INCREDIBLE
THAT LARGE COMPANIES INVEST
MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN
DEVELOPING ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE AND EVERY TIME WE
ASK FOR BETTER SALARIES, THERE
ARE ALWAYS EXCUSES FOR NOT
PAYING US DECENT WAGES. THE
CLEANING INDUSTRY DEPENDS ON THE
EXPLOITATION OF CLEANING
WORKERS. IT IS MOSTLY IMMIGRANT
WOMEN LIKE ME WHO CLEAN AS A
JANITOR, AND IMMIGRANT WOMEN
WITH YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THIS
INDUSTRY, I CAN ATTEST TO THE
OVERWORK AND EXHAUSTING NATURE
OF OUR WORK. MANY OF MY
COWORKERS IN THIS INDUSTRY RELY
ON PAIN MEDICATIONS TO RELIEVE
THE STRESSES OF WORK, AND SOME
HAVE EVEN UNDERGONE SURGERY FOR
INJURIES THAT PERSIST DESPITE
MEDICAL INTERVENTION. DESPITE
THESE CHALLENGES, WE CONTINUE TO
WORK TIRELESSLY TO MAINTAIN THE
CLEANLINESS OF THE MOST
PRESTIGIOUS BUILDINGS, OFTEN AT
GREAT PERSONAL SACRIFICE. I AM
NOT AGAINST ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE. IT IS GOOD THAT IT
IS USED, BUT ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE MUSTN'T BE USED TO
DISPLACE WORKERS. TECHNOLOGY
MUST SERVE THE PEOPLE. IT MUST
END EXPLOITATION AND THE
WORKLOAD. ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE IS ALREADY HERE.
THIS IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR
TECHNOLOGY TO GIVE JANITORS THE
OPPORTUNITY TO PROGRAM ROBOTS,
TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR
GROWTH IN THE INDUSTRY, AND TO
GUARANTEE WELL-PAID JOBS WHERE
WE ARE TREATED WITH RESPECT AND
DIGNITY. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
CANNOT DO THE JOB OF A HUMAN.
NOT LONG AGO, AMID THE MOST
HORRIBLE PANDEMIC IN THE HISTORY
OF OUR HUMAN SPECIES, THE RICH
SAID THAT WE JANITORS WERE
ESSENTIAL. NOW THE RICH WANT TO
REPLACE US WITH MACHINES AND
THAT IS NOT RIGHT. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. GRACIAS. THANK YOU.
AND NEXT WE HAVE PROFESSOR, UCLA
PROFESSOR CHRIS TILLY, WHO'S
ALSO REMOTE. HI, I'M CHRIS
TILLY. I'M A PROFESSOR OF URBAN
PLANNING AND SOCIOLOGY AT UCLA.
GLAD TO HAVE THE CHANCE TO
ADDRESS ALL OF YOU. I HAVE A PHD
IN ECONOMICS, AND FOR 40 YEARS
I'VE BEEN DOING RESEARCH ON BAD
JOBS AND HOW TO MAKE THEM
BETTER. I'VE STUDIED RETAIL JOBS
IN PARTICULAR ON AND OFF, SINCE
THE LATE 1980S, AND STARTING IN
2018, I'VE BEEN CONDUCTING
RESEARCH ON HOW TECHNOLOGICAL
CHANGE IS AFFECTING STORE BASED
RETAIL JOBS. THIS RECENT
RESEARCH INCLUDES ABOUT 91 HOUR
INTERVIEWS AND 110 SHORTER, 15
MINUTE MINI INTERVIEWS WITH
RETAIL PROFESSIONALS, INCLUDING
EXECUTIVES, TECHNOLOGY PROVIDERS
AND CONSULTANTS. IN MY TESTIMONY
TODAY, HOWEVER, I'LL MAINLY BE
DRAWING ON 63 ONE HOUR
INTERVIEWS WITH STORE BASED
EMPLOYEES AND MANAGERS,
CONDUCTED OVER THE LAST TWO
YEARS. THESE WERE MAINLY WORKERS
IN CHAIN STORES, IN GROCERY AND
GENERAL MERCHANDISE, INCLUDING A
LOT OF BIG BOX WORKERS, ALL OVER
THE COUNTRY. BUT A GOOD CHUNK OF
THESE INTERVIEWS WERE WITH
CALIFORNIA WORKERS, AND A LOT OF
THE RETAIL TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE
TALKED ABOUT ARE GETTING PILOTED
IN CALIFORNIA. I'M ALSO GOING TO
REFER BRIEFLY TO NUMBERS FROM
THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS
WHEN IT COMES TO UNDERSTANDING
HOW TECHNOLOGY AFFECTS JOBS, THE
DEVIL IS REALLY IN THE DETAILS.
SO I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON THREE
PARTICULAR JOBS. FIRST, CASHIERS.
BETWEEN 2019 AND 2022, WHICH IS
THE MOST RECENT YEAR. WE'VE GOT
DATA FOR NOW. THE NUMBER OF
CASHIERS WORKING IN GROCERY
STORES FELL BY 14%, WHEREAS THE
OVERALL NUMBER OF WORKERS IN
GROCERY STORES ONLY FELL BY 3%.
IN GENERAL, MERCHANDISE, WHICH
INCLUDES RETAILERS LIKE WALMART
AND TARGET, THE NUMBER OF
CASHIERS WENT DOWN BY 23% AT A
TIME WHEN TOTAL EMPLOYMENT IN
THOSE STORES WAS GROWING BY 3%.
IT'S VERY CLEAR THIS IS DUE TO
THE SPREAD OF SELF-CHECKOUT. THE
INTERVIEWEES TALKED REPEATEDLY
ABOUT HOW SELF-CHECKOUT KIOSKS
WERE REPLACING CASHIERS. ONE
WALMART MANAGER COMMENTED THAT
THE QUOTE PLUS OF SELF-CHECKOUT
IS LESS PAYROLL. WE HEARD ABOUT
MANAGERS WATCHING UP TO SIX
KIOSKS, AND MOST OF THEM DISLIKE
THAT JOB. THERE'S ALSO NEW
TECHNOLOGY BASED SURVEILLANCE OF
CASHIERS AND CUSTOMERS, LIKE
WALMART'S MISSED SCAN SYSTEM
THAT USES OVERHEAD CAMERAS AND
WARNS CASHIERS IF THE SYSTEM
DETECTS THAT THEY MISSED
SCANNING AN ITEM. AND ALSO, OF
COURSE, ALERTS MANAGEMENT. THE
NEXT JOB IS ONLINE ORDER
FILLERS. A HUGE NUMBER OF ONLINE
ORDERS GET FILLED IN STORES FOR
PICKUP OR DELIVERY. TARGET, FOR
EXAMPLE, FILLS MOST OF ITS
ONLINE ORDERS IN ITS STORES.
HERE, THE LEVEL OF SURVEILLANCE
IS OVERWHELMING. WORKERS PICK
ORDERS USING A PHONE OR OTHER
HANDHELD DEVICE OR SMART
GLASSES, AND THE SYSTEM
BASICALLY KEEPS TRACK OF EVERY
MOVE THEY MAKE, WITH MANAGERS
TRACKING HOW QUICKLY AND
ACCURATELY THE WORK GETS DONE.
WALMART TRACKS FIVE MAIN PICKING
STATISTICS AND AT LEAST SOME
WALMARTS POST ALL THE PICKERS
SCORES PUBLICLY. FINALLY, I WANT
TO TALK ABOUT STALKERS. THERE
ARE INCREASING NUMBER OF CAMERAS
ALL OVER THE STORE MOUNTED ON
SHELVES ON ROBOTS THAT ROLL
AROUND THE STORE HANGING FROM
THE CEILING. EVEN ON DRONES.
AMAZON CREATED THE JUST WALK OUT
TECHNOLOGY WHERE YOU PUT THE
MERCHANDISE IN YOUR BASKET AND
JUST WALK OUT OF THE STORE
WITHOUT CHECKING OUT, WHICH MAY
SOUND LIKE MAGIC, BUT THEY'VE
GOT HUNDREDS OF CAMERAS HANGING
FROM THE CEILING IN AN AMAZON
FRESH OR AMAZON GO STORE THAT
USES THIS TECHNOLOGY. RETAILERS
HAVE ALSO SHIFTED FROM HAVING
PEOPLE WATCHING THE CAMERA FEEDS
TO WHAT'S CALLED COMPUTER VISION,
MEANING AI BASED SOFTWARE THAT
CAN INTERPRET THE IMAGES AND
ALERT A MANAGER OR WORKER OR
BOTH. IF SOMETHING IS NOT GOING
ACCORDING TO PLAN. IN MOST
CASES, THIS INCLUDES FACIAL
RECOGNITION SOFTWARE, WHICH IS
ILLEGAL IN EUROPE. IT'S NOT
CLEAR HOW MUCH RETAILERS ARE
USING ALL THIS CAMERA TECHNOLOGY
TO KEEP AN EYE ON WORKERS. SO
FAR, MANAGERS ARE VERY TIGHT
LIPPED ABOUT IT, BUT A GOOD
NUMBER OF WORKERS THINK THEY'RE
BEING WATCHED. AND WHAT'S VERY
CLEAR IS THAT THE TECHNOLOGY
MAKES IT POSSIBLE TO WATCH BOTH
SHOPPERS AND WORKERS AGAIN. THAT
COULD BE PEOPLE DOING THE
WATCHING, OR IT COULD BE
COMPUTER VISION SOFTWARE WITH
ALL THE KINDS OF PROBLEMS OF
SOFTWARE THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN
DISCUSSED. ONE OTHER IMPORTANT
POINT IS THAT THE TECHNOLOGY
OFTEN DOES NOT WORK CORRECTLY. I
HEARD ABOUT JUST JUST ABOUT
EVERY POSSIBLE SCREW UP WITH
SOME OF THESE NEW TECHNOLOGIES.
AND IN SOME CASES, THESE
GLITCHES ARE HAPPENING WEEKLY OR
EVEN MORE OFTEN. I WOULD SINGLE
OUT THREE AREAS FOR PUBLIC
POLICY COULD REALLY MAKE A
DIFFERENCE. FIRST IS REQUIRING A
TECHNOLOGY IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR
MAJOR TECHNOLOGY CHANGES.
RETAILERS ARE IMPLEMENTING NEW
TECHNOLOGY AT A PACE THAT IS
OUTRUNNING OUR UNDERSTANDING OF
ITS IMPLICATIONS. AN IMPACT
ASSESSMENT WILL HELP US MONITOR
FOR POTENTIAL DOWNSIDES. THIS
IMPERATIVE IS PARTICULARLY
STRONG FOR SERVICE INDUSTRIES
LIKE RETAIL, WHERE TECHNOLOGICAL
CHANGES IMPACT CUSTOMERS AS WELL
AS WORKERS. SECOND IS TO LAY
DOWN SOME WORKER AND CONSUMER
TRANSPARENCY AND PRIVACY RATES
RELATED TO NEW TECHNOLOGY. WE
CAN DECLINE ADVERTISING COOKIES,
BUT WE CAN'T DECLINE FACIAL
RECOGNITION SOFTWARE IN THIS
STORE. AGAIN, THE EUROPEAN UNION
HAS VERY STRONG RESTRICTIONS ON
FACIAL RECOGNITION SOFTWARE, AND
A THIRD, MORE RETAIL SPECIFIC
ISSUE IS TO PLACE SOME LIMITS ON
THE USE OF SELF-CHECKOUT
TECHNOLOGY, WHICH IS A JOB
KILLER, AND ITS CURRENT FORM IS
MAKING BOTH WORKERS AND
CONSUMERS MISERABLE. RETAILERS
HAVE THEIR DOUBTS ABOUT
SELF-CHECKOUT, BUT FOR AS LONG
AS I'VE BEEN STUDYING THE RETAIL
SECTOR, IT'S BEEN DOMINATED BY A
LOW COST, LOW SERVICE, HIGH
LABOR CHURNING MODEL WHERE IF
RETAILERS DON'T FOLLOW THE
CROWD, THEY'LL GET UNDERCUT BY
COMPETITORS. IT'S IN THE PUBLIC
INTEREST TO CLOSE OFF
COMPETITION THAT DEGRADES WORK
AND THE SHOPPING EXPERIENCE IN
PURSUIT OF EXTREME COST CUTTING,
SO I'LL LEAVE IT THERE. THANKS
THAT WAS IMPRESSIVE. YEAH, THAT
WAS IMPRESSIVE TIMING. THANK
YOU. NEXT WE HAVE CHRIS NIELSEN,
DIRECTOR OF RESEARCH FOR THE
CALIFORNIA NURSES ASSOCIATION.
YEAH. THANK YOU. OH, DID I SKIP
ZACH. OH, I APOLOGIZE ZACH. YOU
WERE HIDING BACK THERE, IF IT'S
OKAY, I'LL GO TO ZACH GAINOR,
CAMPAIGN RESEARCHER FOR UFCW
LOCAL FIVE. GOOD AFTERNOON,
CHAIR AND COMMITTEE MEMBERS. MY
NAME IS ZACH GAINOR. AS A CHAIR.
SORRY, AND AS THE CHAIR SAID,
I'M A RESEARCHER WITH THE UNITED
FOOD AND COMMERCIAL WORKERS
LOCAL FIVE. WE REPRESENT 30,000
WORKERS IN NORTHERN CALIFORNIA
FROM SALINAS TO EUREKA AND THE
ENTIRE BAY AREA, UFCW REPRESENTS
PRIVATE SECTOR WORKERS IN
GROCERY. AS YOU MENTIONED, DRUG,
RETAIL, RETAIL, FOOD PROCESSING,
AGRICULTURE AND CANNABIS,
TECHNOLOGY AND AUTOMATION OF
WORKERS JOBS IS NOT SOMETHING
THAT'S NEW. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT
IT, BUT AS A UNION, WE BELIEVE
WE STRONGLY BELIEVE THAT ANY NEW
CONSEQUENTIAL TECHNOLOGY
DEPLOYED IN WORKPLACES NEEDS
MORE WORKER CENTRIC, AND INVOLVE
ACTUAL ACTIVE INPUT FROM WORKERS
UTILIZING THE TECHNOLOGY BE USED
TO MAKE WORKERS JOB SAFER AND
NOT REPLACE THE JOBS OF WORKERS.
UNFORTUNATELY OFTENTIMES IN THE
CASE IS USED TO ELIMINATE
WORKERS JOBS, WHICH HAS LED TO
SIGNIFICANT CHALLENGES IN STORES
FOR WORKERS, CUSTOMERS, AND
EMPLOYERS, ESPECIALLY WITH THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF SO-SO
TECHNOLOGY UNDER THE DEFINITION
OF, SORRY, CENTROLEGAL. AND
RESTREPO, RESTREPO IS BASICALLY
AND I'LL READ THIS SORRY
TECHNOLOGY THAT LOWERS THE
DEMAND FOR LABOR WITHOUT ANY
STRONG GAINS IN CONSUMER WELFARE
OR PRODUCTIVITY THREATENING LONG
TERM EMPLOYMENT AND WAGES. AND
SO WE'LL I'LL TALK ABOUT
SELF-CHECKOUT AND HOW THAT IS
FITS THAT DEFINITION. BUT
EMPLOYERS ARE QUICK TO ASSERT
THAT AI AND TECHNOLOGY IS NOT
REPLACING WORKERS JOBS, BUT
FREEING WORKERS UP TO PERFORM
OTHER TASKS LIKE PROVIDING
BETTER, BETTER CUSTOMER SERVICE.
AND WHILE IN THEORY THAT SOUNDS
GREAT, IT'S NOT THE CASE IN IN
REALITY THERE USED TO BE
ELIMINATED JOBS, FORCING WORKERS
TO WORK WITH SKELETON CREWS AND
UNSAFE STAFFING LEVELS, IT'S A
NET NEGATIVE WHEN IT COMES TO
EMPLOYMENT IN THE GROCERY
INDUSTRY. AS THE PROFESSOR SAID
IN STARK NUMBERS, THE UFC
REPRESENTS WORKPLACES THAT ARE
LARGELY OPEN TO THE PUBLIC AND
THE STAPLES TO THE COMMUNITY TO
GET ESSENTIAL GOODS AND
SERVICES. YOU CAN'T GO YOU YOU
NEED TO GO TO A GROCERY STORE TO
GET FOOD, WHEN TECHNOLOGY IS
DEPLOYED IN OUR WORKPLACES, IT'S
NOT ONLY DEPLOYING THE WORKERS,
BUT THE CUSTOMERS AS WELL, BUT
THEY GET NO LIMITED NOTICE OR
INFORMATION ABOUT THAT
TECHNOLOGY BEFORE IT'S DEPLOYED.
SO SELF CHECKOUT, BASICALLY EVEN
THOUGH SELF-CHECKOUTS HAVE BEEN,
EVEN THOUGH SELF-CHECKOUTS ARE
BILLED AS AUTOMATION, THEY'RE
PSEUDO AUTOMATION AT BEST. IT'S
BASICALLY A TRANSFER OF LABOR
FROM THE WORKERS WHO ARE PAID TO
WORK THERE TO THE CUSTOMER. AND
SO YOU'RE NOT ACTUALLY
AUTOMATING ANYTHING, YOU'RE JUST
TRANSFERRING THE COST OF LABOR
TO THE CUSTOMERS, AND INSTEAD
YOU'RE CHANGING THE JOB
FUNDAMENTALLY FROM ONE OF A
CASHIER WHERE, YOU KNOW, I WENT
TO A LOT OF DIFFERENT CASHIERS
AND THEY ONE OF THE THINGS THEY
RELISH IS TALKING TO THE
CUSTOMERS, BEING ABLE TO HAVE
THAT ONE ON ONE INTERACTION
WHILE THEY'RE, YOU KNOW, WHILE
THEY'RE SCANNING THEIR FOOD AND
TALKING TO THEM ABOUT THEIR DAY,
THEIR LIFE. I HAD PEOPLE WHO GO
TO SPECIFIC CASHIERS BECAUSE
THEY'D GONE TO THEM FOR YEARS,
AND INSTEAD OF HAVING THOSE ONE
ON ONE INTERACTIONS AND BEING
ABLE TO DEVELOP RELATIONSHIPS,
THEY HAVE TO DEAL WITH UP TO 6
TO 12 MACHINES AT A TIME, WHICH
MEANS WHEN YOU'RE GOING TO TALK
TO A CUSTOMER, YOU'RE GOING TO
SOMEONE IN DISTRESS, NOT
SOMEBODY WHO'S COMING TO TALK TO
YOU ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN
THEIR LIVES. BUT HEY, THIS SAYS
THAT SOMETHING'S WRONG WITH THE
MACHINE. AND SO YOUR JOB
FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGES FROM ONE
OF, YOU KNOW, TALKING TO
CUSTOMERS TO ALMOST DEALING WITH
THE MACHINE, YOU KNOW, WHICH
WHICH IS A DIFFERENT WHICH IS,
WHICH IS A MACHINE THAT'S ALSO
REPLACING YOUR LABOR, SO THERE'S
DOUBLE INDIGNITY IN THAT. THE
MACHINES ARE NOTORIOUSLY GLITCHY
AND NOT ACCESSIBLE TO ALL
CUSTOMERS, INCLUDING THOSE WITH
DISABILITIES, NON-ENGLISH
SPEAKERS, CUSTOMERS REQUIRING
ADDITIONAL ASSISTANCE, AND THE
UNBANKED. WHICH WILL CAUSE
FURTHER PROBLEMS WITH SOME OF
THE NEW TECHNOLOGY THAT'S BEING
PROPOSED, FURTHERMORE, NEW
SELF-CHECKOUT TECHNOLOGY
REQUIRES FINGERPRINT SCANNING,
RETINAL SCANNING, NEW SMART CARD
TECHNOLOGY REQUIRES CUSTOMERS TO
HAVE CREDIT CARDS AND
SMARTPHONES, WHICH WILL BE A
SIGNIFICANT PROBLEM FOR THOSE
WHO ARE UNBANKED OR USE EBT, YOU
KNOW, EBT HAS VERY STRICT
REQUIREMENTS. YOU CAN'T JUST
REFUND IT. SO IF THESE CARTS
MAKE MISTAKE AND YOU PUT IT IN
AND IT SCANS IT, THERE'S VERY
LITTLE WORK AROUND AND
ESPECIALLY IF YOU CUT OUT ALL
THE LABOR AROUND IT, WHO'S GOING
TO HELP? WHO'S GOING TO DEAL
WITH THAT PROBLEM? IT CREATES A
RANGE OF PROBLEMS FOR OUR
OVERWORKED AND UNDERSTAFFED
WORKFORCE, LONE SELF CHECKOUT
WORKS ARE EXPECTED TO MONITOR
ANYWHERE FROM 4 TO 12 MACHINES
WHILE PERFORMING OTHER TASKS
LIKE PROCESSING MONEY ORDERS,
SELLING LOTTERY TICKETS, OPENING
LOCKED CABINETS AND HANDLING
CUSTOMER SERVICE PHONE LINES. IT
LEAVES VERY LITTLE TIME FOR OUR
CLERKS TO ACTUALLY ASSIST
CUSTOMERS WHEN SELF-CHECKOUT
MACHINES MALFUNCTION, HANDLE
ACTUAL CUSTOMER COMPLAINTS, OR
AND RESPOND TO IRATE CUSTOMERS,
THE LACK OF STAFF AT THE FRONT
OF THE STORE HAS LED TO A
MASSIVE INCREASE IN THEFT, WE
DON'T KNOW THE NUMBERS. PEOPLE
ARE BEING PRETTY TIGHT LIPPED
ABOUT IT, BUT OVER 20 MILLION
AMERICANS HAVE ADMITTED TO A
STOLEN SOMETHING AT
SELF-CHECKOUT, AND NEARLY 9
MILLION AMERICANS SHARING THEY
WOULD DO IT AGAIN, RETAIL THEFT
AT SELF CHECKOUT HAS LED TO
RETAILERS LOSING OVER $10
BILLION IN GROSS REVENUES, IN
ADDITION, 67% OF CONSUMERS
REPORTED DYSFUNCTIONAL SELF
SERVICE KIOSKS, 41% 8% OF
CONSUMERS AVOID SELF-SERVICE
KIOSKS BECAUSE THEY EXPERIENCE A
SLOWER CHECKOUT PROCESS, AND 20%
OF CONSUMERS AVOID SELF CHECKOUT
BECAUSE THEY PREFER INTERACTIONS
WITH EMPLOYEES. THIS IS JUST ONE
EXAMPLE, BUT THE EXAMPLES THAT
HAVE BEEN MENTIONED THAT MIGHT
BE IMPLEMENTED ARE WOULD HAVE
SEVERE CONSEQUENCES IF
IMPLEMENTED WITHOUT WORKER
INPUT. SO SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS
AND FACIAL RECOGNITION
TECHNOLOGY, WE'RE STARTING TO
SEE THE DEPLOYMENT OF
SURVEILLANCE CAMERAS IN GROCERY
STORE WITH FACIAL RECOGNITION
TECHNOLOGY THAT IMPACTS BOTH THE
CONSUMERS AND THE, THE
EMPLOYEES, BUT AS WE'VE SEEN
WITH MANY DIFFERENT STORIES OF
FACIAL RECOGNITION TECHNOLOGY,
NOT BEING ABLE TO PROPERLY
IDENTIFY PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY
PEOPLE OF COLOR, THAT RUNS A
MAJOR RISK AT A GROCERY STORE
WHERE IF YOU'RE WRONGFULLY
PROFILED AND DETAINED, THAT
COULD LEAD TO YOU NOT WANTING TO
GO. AND WHERE ELSE ARE YOU GOING
TO GO? WE DON'T I DON'T
NECESSARILY HAVE A TON OF TIME
TO GO INTO THE OTHER TECHNOLOGY,
BUT THERE IS BEING ELECTRONIC
SHELF TAGS WHICH WOULD LEAD TO,
SURGE PRICING. BASICALLY THE
ADDITION OF SURGE PRICING IN
GROCERY STORES WHERE THEY COULD
CHANGE THE, THE, AS THEY SAY,
THE PRICE OF ICE CREAM ON A
SUMMER DAY, SO THEY COULD CHARGE
BASED ON DEMAND, SO BASICALLY,
WE SUPPORT TECHNOLOGIES THAT
HAVE, WE WANT USE CASE STUDIES,
WE WANT WORKER INPUT, AND WE
WANT TO SUPPORT SENATE BILL 1446
BY SENATOR SMALLWOOD CUEVAS.
THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE FALLOUT
OF SELF CHECKOUT, AS WELL AS
SOME OTHER TECHNOLOGIES AS WELL.
THANK YOU, MR. NIELSEN, YOU MAY
GO NOW. SURE THANK YOU SO MUCH.
THANK YOU. CHAIRS. THANK YOU,
COMMITTEE MEMBERS, FOR THE
OPPORTUNITY, MY NAME IS CHRIS
NIELSEN. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF
EDUCATION FOR THE CALIFORNIA
NURSES ASSOCIATION, AND I'M HERE
ON BEHALF OF OVER 100,000 CNA
NURSES ACROSS THE STATE TO SHARE
SOME OF OUR EXPERIENCES AND OUR
CONCERNS ABOUT AI IN HEALTHCARE,
WHICH POSES SOME UNIQUE CONCERNS
AND RISKS. SO NURSES HAVE ALWAYS
EMBRACED NEW TECHNOLOGIES THAT
ENHANCE THEIR SKILLS AND THAT
IMPROVE PATIENT CARE. BUT WE'RE
CONCERNED THAT IN THE CURRENT
ENVIRONMENT, THE RUSH TO DEPLOY
UNPROVEN AND STILL MOSTLY
UNREGULATED AI TOOLS IN HEALTH
CARE SETTINGS, YOU KNOW, WE
REALLY RISK UNDERMINING THE
HUMANITY AT THE HEART OF NURSING
CARE AND PUTTING PATIENTS IN OUR
COMMUNITIES AT RISK, BACK IN
MARCH OF THIS YEAR, OUR UNION
SURVEYED MORE THAN 2300 RNS AND
FOUND THAT 60% DID NOT TRUST
THEIR EMPLOYERS TO IMPLEMENT AI
WITH PATIENT SAFETY AS THE FIRST
PRIORITY. LONG BEFORE THIS
CURRENT GENERATIVE AI BOOM,
WE'VE SEEN EMPLOYERS DEPLOY MORE
CONVENTIONAL AI AND ALGORITHMIC
TOOLS IN WAYS THAT UNDERMINE THE
HUMAN EXPERTISE AND THE CLINICAL
JUDGMENT THAT'S CENTRAL TO THE
WORK OF HEALING ALGORITHMIC
TECHNOLOGIES DRIVE ALL KINDS OF
TOOLS IN HOSPITALS AND HEALTH
CARE SETTINGS. FROM THE CLINICAL
DECISION SUPPORT ALGORITHMS THAT
ARE EMBEDDED INTO THE ELECTRONIC
HEALTH RECORDS THAT NURSES USE
AT THE BEDSIDE. THEY SHOW UP IN
REMOTE PATIENT MONITORING
SYSTEMS AND PREDICTIVE STAFFING
TOOLS AND MANY OF THESE TOOLS
ARE PRONE TO SERIOUS
INACCURACIES. AND YET, 40% OF
THE NURSES THAT CNA SURVEYED
SAID THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE THE
ABILITY TO OVERRIDE THESE AI
RECOMMENDATIONS, EVEN WHEN THEY
KNOW THAT THEY ARE INCORRECT. SO
LET ME GIVE YOU JUST A COUPLE OF
EXAMPLES OF SOME OF THE ISSUES
THAT WE ARE SEEING, KAISER AND
MANY OTHER LARGE HEALTH CARE
EMPLOYERS USE THE EPIC
ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORD SYSTEM,
WHICH OFTEN INCLUDES A TOOL TO
DETERMINE A PATIENT'S ACUITY OR
HOW CRITICALLY ILL THEY ARE, AND
THEN GENERATES STAFFING
RECOMMENDATIONS BASED ON THESE
SCORES. BUT THESE BLACK BOX
ALGORITHMS WORK OFF A LIMITED
SET OF DATA, AND THEY OFTEN MISS
THE NUANCES AND SUBTLETIES THAT
A REGISTERED NURSE WOULD BE ABLE
TO ASSESS FOR. THE ACCURACY OF
THESE TOOLS ALSO DEPENDS ON THE
NURSES ABILITY TO CHART IN REAL
TIME, BUT IN CHRONICALLY,
SYSTEMATICALLY UNDERSTAFFED
HOSPITALS, THIS IS OFTEN
IMPOSSIBLE. SO IT'S NO SURPRISE
THAT TWO THIRDS OF THE NURSES
THAT WE SURVEYED SAID THAT THESE
AUTOMATED ACUITY SCORES DO NOT
MATCH THEIR OWN ASSESSMENTS OF A
PATIENT'S ACUITY. AND THESE
INACCURATE ASSESSMENTS CAN LEAD
TO HARMFUL DELAYS IN TREATMENT,
POTENTIALLY EVEN DEADLY ADVERSE
EVENTS, ALGORITHMIC BIAS IS ALSO
A MAJOR PROBLEM IN OUR
WORKPLACES, AND NURSES ARE
CONCERNED THAT IT COULD BE
EXACERBATED BY THIS RUSH TO
DEPLOY UNPROVEN GENERATIVE AI
SYSTEMS, THE NEWER KIND OF
GENERATION OF AI THAT WE'RE
SEEING. A RECENT STANFORD STUDY
OF FOUR GENERATIVE AI TOOLS THAT
ARE BEING PILOTED IN HOSPITALS
ACROSS THE COUNTRY FOUND THAT
ALL FOUR OF THEM PERPETUATED,
DEBUNKED RACE BASED MEDICAL
PRACTICES BASED ON THE
MISCONCEPTIONS ABOUT THE
SUPPOSED BIOLOGICAL DIFFERENCES
BETWEEN PATIENTS OF COLOR AND
WHITE PATIENTS, AND I THINK
WE'RE ALL PROBABLY FAMILIAR NOW
WITH GENERATIVE AI'S PROPENSITY
TO HALLUCINATE IN THE INDUSTRY
PARLANCE, OR JUST MAKE THINGS UP,
WHICH IN HEALTHCARE, AS YOU CAN
IMAGINE, WOULD POSE UNIQUE
RISKS. A RECENT STUDY OF A
GENERATIVE AI TOOL THAT'S BEING
PILOTED AT A HOSPITAL IN BOSTON
FOUND THAT IT MADE SAFETY ERRORS
42% OF THE TIME WHEN RESPONDING
TO SIMULATED QUESTIONS FROM
CANCER PATIENTS. AND HERE IN
CALIFORNIA, SEVERAL EMPLOYERS
HAVE BEGUN TO PILOT SIMILAR
TOOLS FOR A RANGE OF USE CASES,
FROM LISTENING IN AND
SUMMARIZING PATIENT VISITS TO
AUTOMATING CLINICAL
DOCUMENTATION AND RESPONDING TO
PATIENT COMMUNICATIONS. SO
AGAIN, JUST USING KAISER AS AN
EXAMPLE, THEY'VE BEGUN USING A
TOOL CALLED DESKTOP MEDICINE TO
READ PATIENT MESSAGES AND THEN
AUTOMATICALLY ROUTE THOSE
MESSAGES TO WHAT IT THINKS IS
THE RIGHT CLINICIAN TO RESPOND.
BUT THAT'S THE ROLE OF A TRIAGE
NURSE WHO USES THEIR CLINICAL
JUDGMENT TO ASSESS A PATIENT'S
NEEDS, TO ASK ADDITIONAL
QUESTIONS IF NECESSARY, AND THEN
GET THEM THE APPROPRIATE CARE.
EMPLOYERS, ONE OF THEIR COMMON
CLAIMS IS THAT GENERATIVE AI, IN
PARTICULAR, WILL SAVE NURSES
TIME ON ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS SO
THAT THEY CAN FOCUS ON DIRECT
PATIENT CARE, BUT IN OUR
EXPERIENCE, THIS IS NOT THE
CASE. AND SOME OF THE EMERGING
STUDIES BEAR THIS OUT. A STUDY
RECENTLY FROM UCSD FOUND THAT A
GENERATIVE AI TOOL BEING USED
THERE DID NOT SAVE CLINICIANS
ANY TIME WHEN THEY WERE USING IT
TO DRAFT REPLIES TO PATIENT
MESSAGES. AND IN FACT, THEY
SPENT 22% MORE TIME RESPONDING
TO MESSAGES BECAUSE OF THE
ADDITIONAL TIME NEEDED TO REVIEW
THESE DRAFTS FOR ERRORS. SO THE
POINT IS JUST THAT THE EMERGING
SCIENCE AROUND GENERATIVE AI IN
HEALTH CARE DOES NOT SUPPORT
CLAIMS THAT IT CAN SUBSTITUTE
FOR THE CLINICAL JUDGMENT OR THE
EFFECTIVENESS OF HUMAN NURSES,
AND ATTEMPTS TO DO THAT POSE
SERIOUS THREATS TO PATIENTS, TO
COMMUNITIES, AND TO OUR
PROFESSION. THE GOOD NEWS IS
THAT THROUGH COLLECTIVE ACTION,
THROUGH COLLECTIVE BARGAINING,
NURSES HAVE BEEN ABLE TO PUSH
EMPLOYERS TO IMPROVE SOME OF
THESE SYSTEMS, MAKE SOME OF THEM
SAFER, MORE TRANSPARENT, OR IN
CASES WHERE THAT'S IT'S NOT
POSSIBLE TO DEPLOY THESE SYSTEMS
SAFELY TO PREVENT THEIR
IMPLEMENTATION ALTOGETHER. BUT
WE ALSO NEED PUBLIC POLICIES
THAT EMPOWER HEALTHCARE WORKERS
TO BE IN THE DRIVER'S SEAT. WHEN
IT COMES TO AI, WE NEED TO
STRENGTHEN WORKERS RIGHTS ACROSS
THE STATE TO BARGAIN OVER THESE
DECISIONS, NOT JUST OVER HOW
THEY SHOULD BE DEPLOYED, BUT
WHETHER CERTAIN TOOLS SHOULD BE
DEPLOYED IN CERTAIN USE CASES AT
ALL, WE BELIEVE THAT LEGISLATION
SHOULD BE BASED ON A CERTAIN SET
OF PRINCIPLES. AND I'LL WRAP UP
HERE MOMENTARILY, WE'VE RELEASED
SOME PRINCIPLES IN OUR NURSES
AND AI PATIENTS BILL OF RIGHTS,
AND WE CAN SHARE THAT WITH YOU
ALL. AFTER THE HEARING. AND I'LL
JUST CONCLUDE BY HIGHLIGHTING
TWO OF THOSE PRINCIPLES. FIRST,
ALL PATIENTS DESERVE THE EXPERT,
COMPASSIONATE, HANDS ON CARE
THAT ONLY HUMAN NURSES CAN
PROVIDE. WE'VE SEEN UNIONS IN
OTHER INDUSTRIES SAG-AFTRA, THE
WRITER'S GUILD, DEMONSTRATE THAT
IT'S POSSIBLE TO DRAW A RED LINE
WHEN IT COMES TO REPLACING
WORKERS WITH AI, AND WE NEED
PUBLIC POLICY IN IN HEALTHCARE
TO ALLOW NURSES AND WORKERS TO
DO THE SAME THING. AND IN THE
CASE OF OTHER POTENTIALLY
ACCEPTABLE USES OF AI IN
HEALTHCARE, USES THAT DON'T
REPLACE OR DE-SKILLED NURSES, WE
NEED REGULATIONS THAT ARE BASED
ON THE PRECAUTIONARY PRINCIPLE.
RIGHT NOW, WE HAVE ESSENTIALLY A
WILD WEST IN HEALTHCARE WHERE AI
TOOLS ARE BEING DEPLOYED WITHOUT
ANY EVIDENCE OF THEIR SAFETY,
THEIR EFFICACY, EQUITY, SO WE
NEED TO BE ABLE TO PUT THE
BURDEN OF PROOF ON TO TECH
DEVELOPERS, TO DEPLOYERS, TO
EMPLOYERS TO PROVE THAT THESE
TECHNOLOGIES ARE SAFE, EFFECTIVE
AND EQUITABLE BEFORE THEY'RE
USED IN REAL WORLD HEALTH CARE
SETTINGS. AND, YOU KNOW, WE DO,
AS OTHERS HAVE SAID, HAVE THE
OPPORTUNITY HERE IN CALIFORNIA
TO SET THE STANDARD. AND WE LOOK
FORWARD TO WORKING WITH ALL OF
YOU ON POLICIES THAT CAN PUT OUR
PATIENTS AND OUR COMMUNITIES
FIRST. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. I
WOULD LIKE TO, RECOGNIZE THAT WE
HAVE ASSEMBLY MEMBER WENDY
CARRILLO WHO HAS JOINED US AND
ASSEMBLY MEMBER BRIAN, DO YOU
HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS
PANEL? I JUST I REALLY
APPRECIATE HEARING FROM
EVERYBODY. WE ARE IN ALL THESE
AREAS IN THE WILD WEST TRYING TO
FIGURE OUT, WHAT DIRECTION WE GO
TO REALLY BENEFIT WORKERS AND
PATIENTS. AND AS, AS ASSEMBLY
MEMBER BAUER-KAHAN SAID, WE
REALLY YOU KNOW, THE IDEA IS
THAT YOU'RE USING AI AS A TOOL,
BUT IT IS DISTURBING TO HEAR
WITH THE NURSES THAT THAT YOU
ARE THAT THERE ARE AI TOOLS THAT
YOU CAN'T OVERRIDE. I MEAN,
THAT'S NOT USING AI AS A TOOL TO
AUGMENT YOUR WORK. SO IS DO
HOSPITALS HAVE DO SOME OF THE
HOSPITALS HAVE POLICIES THAT
THERE ALWAYS HAS TO BE A WORKER
IN THE LOOP, YES. WELL, I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT TO MAYBE
DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN A WORKER
IN THE LOOP AFTER THESE TOOLS
HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED, THAT'S
WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. THAT
THAT'S, THAT IS COMMUNICATING
WITH THE PATIENT. YES, YES YES,
YES, I THINK THAT'S THAT'S
IMPORTANT. IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT
TO, I THINK, INCLUDE WORKERS
EARLIER IN THE PROCESS. RIGHT.
AND WE HAVE, NEGOTIATED CONTRACT
LANGUAGE WITH A NUMBER OF
EMPLOYERS THAT REQUIRES
NOTIFICATION, REQUIRES THE RIGHT
TO BARGAIN OVER, YOU KNOW, THE
DEPLOYMENT, THE DESIGN, IN MANY
CASES OF THESE TOOLS, AND THAT'S
IMPORTANTLY SAFEGUARDS THE
CLINICAL JUDGMENT OF NURSES TO
BE ABLE TO OVERRIDE NOW THAT
EXISTS ONLY IN THESE FACILITIES
WHERE WE HAVE THOSE PROTECTIONS
NEGOTIATED. AND SO I THINK PART
OF, THE TASK HERE IS TO EXPAND
AND EXTEND THOSE TYPES OF
PROTECTIONS TO NURSES AND HEALTH
CARE WORKERS ACROSS THE STATE.
AND THEN I GUESS FOR ALL THESE
TOOLS, I THINK, THE REALLY
IMPORTANT, THE OTHER REALLY
IMPORTANT RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
EMPLOYER IS TO CONTINUE TO
UPSKILL THE WORKERS SO THAT
THERE IS ALWAYS A JOB FOR THE
WORKER. AND SO ARE WE SEEING
THAT IN, BARGAINING YET?
MOORLACH. CÁC LA OPORTUNIDAD DE
CæA. AUMENTANDO MEJOR EN LA
CALIDAD DE TRABAJO. CUANDO ESTA
NEGOCIANDO CON LA UNION O MIEDO
A LA OPORTUNIDAD DE C¯. USTEDES
PUEDEN NEGOCIAR PARA C¯ EN ESTA
TECNOLOGIA PARA MEJORAR SU
TRABAJO. TODAVIA NO NOS ESTÉ HAN
DICHO TODAVIA NADA. PERO SI HAY
LA OPORTUNIDAD DE NEGOCIAR SI
THEY HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY
TO, BRING THIS UP. BUT IF THEY
EVER, PROPOSE THIS, THEY WOULD
BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO, CARRY
THIS CONVERSATION ON BECAUSE
YOU'RE USING THE WORD DE SKILL.
AND I THINK THAT THAT IS WE
CANNOT HAVE THAT GOING FORWARD.
WE SHOULD ONLY BE TALKING ABOUT
THE RESPONSIBILITY TO UPSKILL. I
THINK WE DO HAVE UPSKILLING AS A
PART OF THE CONVERSATION, BUT
IT'S ALSO UNDERSTANDING HOW THE
TECHNOLOGY WOULD BE ROLLED OUT,
WHICH IS WHY ONE OF THE KEY
THINGS THAT PEOPLE, I THINK HEAR
TODAY ARE ENHANCING IS THAT
WORKERS NEED TO BE IN THE
CONVERSATION EARLY SO THAT
INSTEAD OF BEING DE-SKILLED, SO
THEY NEED TO BE UPSKILLED, THE
TECHNOLOGY CAN ACTUALLY BE USED
TO SUPPLEMENT THEIR WORK, SO
THEY'RE NOT BEING DE-SKILLED,
AND WE'RE HAVING TO COME UP WITH
NEW WAYS TO UPSKILL THESE
WORKERS WHEN THEY CAN KEEP DOING
THEIR JOB IN THE AI, CAN SUPPORT
THEM RATHER THAN UNDERMINE THEM.
SO THERE'S TWO WAYS OF
APPROACHING IT THAT WE ARE
TRYING TO CONSIDER AND
DEFINITELY HAVE IN NEGOTIATIONS.
BUT I THINK A KEY COMPONENT IS
HAVING THE WORKERS ENGAGE IN THE
TECHNOLOGY EARLY SO THAT IT'S
ASSISTING THEM AND BENEFITING
THEM MORE THAN DE-SKILLING THEM.
RIGHT. WELL, BEING ABLE TO, BE
BE IN THE LOOP EARLY, BUT ALSO
BEING ABLE TO OVERRIDE AND USE
JUDGMENT. YEAH. YES. THANK YOU.
AND AGAIN, GREAT CONVERSATION.
REALLY IMPORTANT. WE'VE WE'VE
HAD A LOT OF, BASICALLY THE USE
OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF
TECHNOLOGY DISPLACES WORKERS TO
WHAT THEY WOULD WHAT THEY WILL
THEN EITHER NEGOTIATE AT LOWER
RATES OR WILL TRY AND EXCLUDE
FROM THE BARGAINING UNIT, AND SO
WE'VE SEEN IT, MOSTLY USED TO,
PUSH WORKERS WAGES DOWN AND TO,
THIN OUT THE SCHEDULE. IN MOST
OF THE RETAIL INDUSTRY,
ESPECIALLY WITH GROCERY, YOU'RE
DEALING WITH FOOD THERE, YOU
KNOW, THERE'S PERISHABLE ITEMS.
YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY
AND MACHINES ALSO CAN'T, BECAUSE
MACHINES CAN'T ALWAYS GRAB. SO I
KNOW IT'S MORE TECHNICAL, BUT A
MACHINE CAN'T GRAB BROCCOLI
WITHOUT BRUISING IT. SO YOU
CREATE AGAIN. YOU'RE JUST
SHIFTING. YOU'RE SHIFTING THE
LABOR TO ANOTHER ANOTHER TYPE OF
JOB. AND THEN THEY'RE DECLARING
THAT JOBS LESS VALUABLE AND THEN
PAYING PEOPLE LESS. SO YOU KNOW,
THERE ARE THERE ARE THERE ARE
SOMETIMES NEW JOBS BECAUSE
AGAIN, THIS MOST OF IT'S
DISPLACEMENT OF LABOR. BUT WE
NEED TO FIGURE OUT WAYS TO MAKE
SURE THAT WORKERS DON'T KEEP
LOSING AGAINST CORPORATIONS,
THAT HAVE THE ABILITY TO JUST
IMPLEMENT THIS TECHNOLOGY
WITHOUT ANY INPUT WHATSOEVER
FROM WORKERS OR ANYBODY ELSE.
QUITE FRANKLY, CHAIR BAUER-KAHAN
AND THEN ASSEMBLY MEMBER
CARILLO, THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR,
I REALLY APPRECIATED WHAT MISS
ARCINIEGA I GOT THAT RIGHT. WHAT
SHE SAID ABOUT, THE JANITORS
BEING PARTNERS IN TRAINING AND
USING THE TECHNOLOGY. AND I
THINK IT REALLY GOES TO WHAT WE
HEARD MISS IRWIN SAY, WHICH IS,
HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT OUR
WORKERS ARE AT THE TABLE? THERE
WAS ACTUALLY AN ARTICLE, I
THINK, JUST THIS WEEK ABOUT, AND
I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE ANY OF OUR
EDUCATION FOLKS HERE AT THE
TABLE, BUT WELL ABOUT THE
SAN DIEGO SCHOOL DISTRICT
ACTUALLY DIDN'T MENTION WHETHER
TEACHERS WERE AT THE TABLE WHEN
THAT I WAS SELECTED. BUT MY GUT
TELLS ME I KNOW THE ANSWER, AND
I THINK THAT THAT IS A PERFECT
EXAMPLE OF WHERE IF YOU PUT THE
PEOPLE WHO KNOW THIS THE BEST,
WHICH IS OUR WORKERS AT THE
TABLE, TO MAKE SELECTIONS TO
HELP DECIDE WHERE IT'S
APPROPRIATE AND HOW TO USE IT,
WE WOULDN'T HAVE THESE PROBLEMS.
RIGHT. SO I THINK IT ALSO IS
CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT WE'RE
SMART ABOUT THIS. AND IN SO
DOING, I THINK WE CAN ONLY DO
THAT BY BRINGING WORKERS TO THE
TABLE TO FIGURE OUT HOW IT BEST
AUGMENTS THEIR WORK IN WAYS THAT
ARE EFFECTIVE AND NOT
DETRIMENTAL TO THE END PRODUCT.
HERE, THE STUDENTS, BUT I ALSO,
YOU KNOW, AND I DID WANT TO
BRING UP THE CONSUMER PIECE,
WHICH I THINK IS REALLY
IMPORTANT BECAUSE I THINK A LOT
OF WHAT YOU'RE ADVOCATING FOR IS
BOTH IMPORTANT TO OUR WORKERS,
BUT ALSO IMPORTANT TO THE
CONSUMERS. SOME OF WHICH WAS
MENTIONED BRIEFLY. BUT I
RECENTLY TOOK MY CHILDREN TO THE
PEDIATRICIAN AND WAS HANDED A
RELEASE FORM. THE RELEASE FORM
WAS FOR AN AI TOOL THAT THE
DOCTOR WANTED TO USE TO DO THEIR
NOTE, TAKING THE RELEASE FORM
SAID THAT THE COMPANIES THAT
OWNED THE AI. AMONG THOSE WAS
AMAZON WOULD HAD THE RIGHT TO
USE MY VOICE AND ANY INFORMATION
TAKEN FROM THAT AI IN ANY WAY.
AND REDISTRIBUTE IT WITHOUT
HIPAA PROTECTIONS. I WAS SO
APPALLED THAT I NOT ONLY DIDN'T
SIGN THE FORM, BUT I WENT TO MY
DOCTOR AND I SAID, I CAN'T
BELIEVE YOU'RE EVEN ASKING
PEOPLE TO SIGN THIS. NOW I'M AN
AI POLICY EXPERT, RIGHT? SO I
READ THAT AND I KNOW WHAT TO DO
WITH IT. BUT THE FACT THAT WE
ARE EVEN ASKING PATIENTS TO SIGN
RELEASE FORMS THAT GIVE AWAY
WHAT WE, AS THE GOVERNMENT, HAVE
DEEMED THE MOST CRITICAL PRIVATE
INFORMATION IN OUR LIVES, OUR
HEALTHCARE INFORMATION IS
APPALLING TO ME. BUT THAT IS
WHAT IN THIS INSTANCE, YOU KNOW,
I'M ASSUMING AMAZON'S LAWYERS
HAD HANDED TO THE HEALTHCARE
COMPANY AND THEN TRICKLED DOWN
TO MY DOCTOR WHO CARED DEEPLY,
AND WHEN I BROUGHT IT UP WITH
HER, SHE DIDN'T ACTUALLY REALIZE
IT WAS IN THE RELEASE AND WAS
CONCERNED AS WELL, SO I, YOU
KNOW, I THINK THE CONSUMER IS
REALLY IMPORTANT HERE. AND
AGAIN, HAD MY DOCTOR WHO WAS THE
WORKER IN THIS INSTANCE. RIGHT.
IT CAN BE NURSES, IT CAN BE, YOU
KNOW, BEEN BROUGHT INTO THAT
CONVERSATION. AND IF WE PUT THIS
IN THE DOCTOR'S OFFICE, YOUR
PATIENT'S HEALTHCARE INFORMATION
WILL NOW NO LONGER BE PROTECTED.
I ACTUALLY TRUST THAT THE
DOCTORS WOULD HAVE MADE A
DIFFERENT DECISION, BECAUSE I DO
THINK THE WORKERS OFTEN MAKE
DECISIONS THAT ARE MORE
PROTECTIVE OF PATIENTS.
CONSUMERS STUDENTS, WHOEVER IT
IS IN THE SETTING IN WHICH AI IS
BEING USED. AND SO I THINK IT'S
SUCH AN IMPORTANT POINT THAT WAS
BROUGHT UP TODAY. AND I REALLY
WANTED TO ELEVATE EVEN FURTHER,
BUT I DID, HAVE A QUESTION
ABOUT, YOU KNOW, I THINK
SOMETHING THAT HAS COME UP TODAY
THAT IS REALLY IMPORTANT IS THIS
CONVERSATION AROUND IMPACT
ASSESSMENTS. AND AS MANY PEOPLE
IN THE ROOM KNOW, I'VE BEEN
WORKING ON A BILL DEALING WITH
MUCH OF WHAT WE HEARD ABOUT AS
IT RELATES TO BIAS IN SOME OF
THESE AUTOMATED DECISION TOOLS
THAT'S SURROUNDING THIS QUESTION
OF DOING IMPACT ASSESSMENTS AND
ENSURING THAT BIAS IS REMOVED
FROM THOSE TOOLS BEFORE THEY'RE
DEPLOYED. ALSO PROVIDING NOTICE
SO PEOPLE KNOW WHEN THESE TOOLS
ARE BEING USED AND CAN OPT OUT,
ETC. BUT THERE IS REALLY THIS
INTERESTING CONVERSATION AROUND
HOW DO WE MAKE SURE THAT AS WE
PUT THIS REGULATION INTO PLACE,
IT'S EFFECTIVE, RIGHT. AND SO,
YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO REGULATE.
WE WANT TO PROTECT WORKERS, WE
WANT TO PROTECT CONSUMERS. BUT
WE ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT
WE DO IT RIGHT, RIGHT. AND THAT
WE DON'T JUST PUT REGULATION OUT
THERE THAT ISN'T AS EFFECTIVE AS
WE NEED IT TO BE FOR CONSUMERS.
AND I WILL SAY THAT, THAT OUR
CONSTITUENTS WANT US TO DO THIS.
I'VE SEEN POLLING NOW OVER AND
OVER AGAIN THAT SHOWS THAT
SOMEWHERE AROUND 90% OF
CALIFORNIANS WANT US TO REGULATE
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE. THEY
DON'T LIKE THE WAY THEY VIEW IT
AS GOING TO AFFECT THEIR JOBS,
THEIR LIVES, THEIR PRIVACY. NAME
IT, THE ENVIRONMENT. WE CAN TALK
ABOUT THE ENERGY USAGE OF AI AND
THE WAY THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT
CLIMATE. LIKE THERE'S A LOT OF
IMPACTS THAT PEOPLE WANT US TO
BE FOCUSED ON. AND SO I THINK WE
AT THIS TABLE, THE MAJORITY OF
US, I WOULD SAY, WANT TO
REGULATE THIS IN A WAY THAT
REALLY HELPS WORKERS AND
CONSUMERS. WHICH I THINK ARE
OFTEN ALIGNED, BUT WE WANT TO DO
IT. RIGHT. SO I WAS JUST
WONDERING IF YOU HAD ANY
THOUGHTS ON SORT OF WHAT IS MOST
IMPORTANT FOR US TO PAY
ATTENTION AS WE MOVE FORWARD IN
REGULATING THIS, BECAUSE I THINK
IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE KEEP
THOSE TWO THINGS CENTRAL. AND TO
ME, PUTTING WORKERS AT THE TABLE
IS PROBABLY THE MOST OBVIOUS. SO
I GUESS YOU DON'T NEED TO SAY
THAT AGAIN, BECAUSE I'VE MADE
THAT POINT. 8E REITERATED THAT
POINT. BUT ANYTHING ELSE THAT
YOU THINK WE SHOULD REALLY PAY
ATTENTION TO? THANK YOU. COULD
YOU REPEAT THE LAST QUESTION?
YEAH. WHAT IS POLICYMAKERS
BEYOND PUTTING WORKERS AT THE
TABLE? BECAUSE I THINK THAT
POINT IS, WELL TAKEN, SHOULD WE
BE MOST Þ SHOULD WE BE MOST
AWARE OF AS WE MOVE POLICY
FORWARD? I DON'T KNOW, I TRY TO.
QUÊ ES UNA COSA IMPORTANTE
FIRST, BUT I GOT TO I'LL LET THE
PROFESSOR GO. HE CAN GO FIRST
BECAUSE HE'S BEEN. YEAH
PROFESSOR, IT LOOKS LIKE THE
PROFESSOR HAS HIS HAND UP ON THE
SCREEN. SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND
CALL ON HIM. THERE'S ACTUALLY
TWO PROFESSORS WITH THEIR HANDS
UP, AND I THINK THE OTHER ONE
HAD HER HAND UP FIRST. THAT'S
OKAY. I'LL JUST, QUICKLY, REPLY.
SO I FEEL LIKE THE CONSUMERISM
IS LIKE ACTUALLY SOMETHING
THAT'S, REALLY UNDER LIKE, UNDER
THOUGHT IN, IN ALL OF THIS. SO
AND I CALL THIS ACTUALLY A FOR
AI AND HIRING THESE TOOLS, I
CALL IT LIKE FORCED CONSUMERISM
BECAUSE EVERYONE WHO WANTS THE
JOB, ARE THEY GOING TO SAY NO?
IF YOU GET A LINK AND SAYS, YOU
KNOW, YOUR APPLICATION WILL BE
THROWN OUT UNLESS YOU DO THIS AI
BASED VIDEO INTERVIEW, EVEN
THOUGH, YOU KNOW, OFTENTIMES THE
AI PART IS LIKE FINE PRINT AND A
LOT OF JOB SEEKERS DON'T EVEN
KNOW. BUT WHEN I TALK TO THEM,
THEY'RE NOT GOING TO SAY NO
BECAUSE THEY WANT THE JOB. SO
THEY KIND OF FORCED TO CONSUME
THIS TECHNOLOGY AND THEY HAVE NO
IDEA IF IT WORKS OR NOT OR IF IT
THIS, THIS DISCRIMINATES. SO,
AND I HAVE A LOT OF THOUGHTS ON
SORT OF CHECKING THE
EFFECTIVENESS. SO I THINK WHAT
WE NEED IS LIKE MUCH MORE,
TRANSPARENCY AND EXPLAINABILITY.
SO IF WE COULD GIVE EVEN WORKERS
OR JOB APPLICANTS OR WORKERS,
SORT OF THE RIGHT TO GET THEIR
DATA BACK, THAT WOULD ALSO HELP
US RESEARCHERS SORT OF
UNDERSTAND, DOES THIS TECHNOLOGY
WORK ON A GRAND SCALE? NOT ON
ONE PERSON, BUT MAYBE ON
HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE? I THINK WHAT
WE'VE SEEN THAT DOES NOT WORK,
AND I'VE REPORTED ON THIS FOR
MIT TECHNOLOGY REVIEW. THERE IS
KIND OF THIRD PARTY AUDITS WHERE
COMPANIES THAT BUILT THE
TECHNOLOGY PAY THIRD PARTY
AUDITORS TO CHECK IF THE
TECHNOLOGY WORKS. AND THERE HAVE
BEEN TWO IN THE AI HIRING SPACE
AND BOTH, WERE REALLY
PROBLEMATIC IN FACT, IN ONE OF
THE CASES, THE RESEARCHERS TOLD
ME WHILE I WAS REPORTING THE
STORY THAT THEY FOUND,
PROBLEMATIC THINGS, WHERE
MARGINALIZED GROUP ACTUALLY DID
NOT PASS AND WERE DISCRIMINATED,
AND THAT WAS NOT IT. THAT WAS
OMITTED FROM THE FINAL REPORT,
BECAUSE THE COMPANY PAID THE
RESEARCHERS TO DO THIS. SO I
THINK WE NEED, YOU KNOW, I CAN
THINK OF LIKE, SORT OF THE
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION OR
OTHER PLACES TO, YOU KNOW, NIST
AND OTHERS TO SORT OF HAVE
THESE, MAYBE GRANTS OR
INCENTIVES FOR RESEARCHERS THAT
ARE NOT AFFILIATED, NOT GETTING
PAID TO ACTUALLY CHECK THESE
TOOLS. THANK YOU. YES, I WOULD
ECHO THAT. GO AHEAD. OKAY. I
WOULD ECHO THE POINT ABOUT
TRANSPARENCY. I THINK THAT
TRANSPARENCY AND REPORTING ARE
INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT. AND THE
SAD FACT IS THAT TYPICALLY BOTH
THE TECHNOLOGY PROVIDERS, MAKING
THE TOOLS AND THE EMPLOYERS
USING THE TOOLS ARE VERY
RESISTANT TO THAT KIND OF
REPORTING. SO THAT'S ESSENTIAL.
BUT THE COUNTERPART TO THAT IS
TO SAY, OKAY, SO WE'RE
GENERATING A BUNCH OF BIG DATA
ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT'S HAPPENING
WITH THESE TECHNOLOGIES. HOW DO
WE MAKE SENSE OF THAT? THERE
HAVE TO BE HUMAN RESOURCES
DEVOTED TO ACTUALLY ANALYZING
THE INFORMATION AS IT COMES IN,
AND WE CAN USE AI FOR THAT TOO.
BUT THERE HAS TO BE SOME PEOPLE
AT THE HELM THERE, AND WE KNOW
FROM PAST PRACTICE THAT MAKING A
LAW BUT NOT THINKING ABOUT HOW
TO MONITOR AND ENFORCE SIMPLY
DOESN'T WORK. LET'S NOT MAKE
THAT MISTAKE THIS TIME. YEAH AND
THEN I JUST HAD SO WE HAD 1440.
CAN YOU. I'M SORRY. CAN YOU GET
CLOSER TO THE MIC. SURE. SORRY
ABOUT THAT. SO, I THINK WE HAVE
SB 1446 WHICH TALKS ABOUT
SELF-CHECKOUT, SAFE STAFFING
LEVELS AT SELF-CHECKOUT,
LIMITING THE NUMBER OF ITEMS
REQUIRING WORKERS TO, REQUIRING
A NOTICE TO WORKERS IN THE
PUBLIC WHEN NEW CONSEQUENTIAL
WORKPLACE TECHNOLOGY IS ADOPTED.
ME PERSONALLY, I THINK THERE
NEEDS TO BE A LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF
LIABILITY FOR AI BECAUSE IS IT
THE PERSON RUNNING THE MODEL? IS
IT THE IS IT THE COMPANY THAT
OWNS THE MODEL THAT'S BEING RUN?
IS IT THE EMPLOYER THAT DEPLOYS
IT THERE NEEDS TO BE A WAY TO
ACTUALLY HOLD PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE
IN A MEANINGFUL MONETARY WAY,
FOR VIOLATING THE LAW OR PUTTING
PEOPLE AT RISK, AND SO, YOU
KNOW, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU
KNOW, I DON'T HAVE NECESSARILY
THE INSIGHTS FOR, BUT I KNOW
THAT THAT NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING
THAT'S ESTABLISHED BECAUSE
OTHERWISE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO
FLOUT THE LAWS UNTIL THERE'S
ACTUALLY A WAY TO PROSECUTE THEM
AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY ACTUALLY
PAY IN A MEANINGFUL WAY FOR IT.
AND IF I MAY, AND WE'LL I THINK
THAT'S ACTUALLY A CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT POINT. AND I THINK ONE
OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE SAID
PUBLICLY MANY TIMES IS THAT WE
ARE AT A MOMENT IN TIME, THE
PRECIPICE, I THINK, IS WHAT,
SARAH SAID, WHERE WE HAVE A
CHOICE TO MAKE. AND WHEN THE
INTERNET CAME TO PASS, WE MADE A
CHOICE. WELL, NOT US IN THIS
ROOM, BUT THE GOVERNMENT MADE A
CHOICE TO PASS SECTION 230 AND
ENSURE THERE WAS NO LIABILITY
FOR SOCIAL MEDIA COMPANIES. AND
WE HAVE SEEN THE RESULTS OF
THAT. AND WE ARE AT A MOMENT IN
TIME WHERE WE GET TO MAKE A
DIFFERENT CHOICE. AND I ACTUALLY
THINK IT'S REALLY CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT THAT WE MAKE A
DIFFERENT CHOICE BECAUSE IT IS
NOW REALLY HARD AND WE TRY EVERY
DAY IN THIS, BUILDING TO TRY TO
ENSURE THAT OUR CHILDREN ARE
PROTECTED FROM THE HARMS OF
SOCIAL MEDIA AND PUTTING THAT
BACK IN THE BOTTLE IS REALLY,
REALLY CHALLENGING. AND SO I
THINK THE LIABILITY PIECE IS
CRITICAL. ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S
CARILLO. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.
MADAM CHAIRS, I JUST, ONE, I
WANT TO ECHO THE COMMENTS THAT
HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE, BUT UNAS
POCAS PALABRAS EN ESPANOL A LA
SENORA ARCINIEGA. QUÉ BUENO, QUÉ
ESTA USTED AQUI? HABLANDO DE LOS
PROBLEMAS Y LAS COSAS C¯ TIENEN
SU TRABAJO. ES ALGO MUY
IMPORTANTE. QUÊ C¯ TODOS LOS
TRABAJADORES A TRAVÉS DEL ESTADO
DE CALIFORNIA. SE HAN VISTO SI
OIDOS AQUI. EN ESTE LUGAR, DONDE
HACEMOS LAS LEYES NECESARIAS
PARA PODER PROTEGER A SU TRABAJO
Y A SU FAMILIA Y LA QUIERO DAR
LAS GRACIAS POR VENIR. CREO C¯
ESTAMOS EN UN MEMENTO MUY
OPORTUNO LO KHN COMENTADO AQUI
EN EL COMITÉ DE C¯, LA
TECNOLOGIA DE LA INTELIGENCIA
ARTIFICIAL Y LA CAUSA QUÊ ESTA
EL ANO. C¯ ESTA HACIENDO A
MUCHOS A MUCHOS TRABAJADORES DE
TRABAJADORES TRABAJOS EN GENERAL
A TRAVÉS DEL ESTADO. ES ALGO C¯
TENEMOS C¯ VER Y ES BASTANTE
IMPORTANTE PARA EL FUTURO DE
NUESTRAS FAMILIAS. Y NO QUIERO
DAR LAS GRACIAS POR VENIR. OKAY,
I WANT TO JUST, YOU KNOW, I WANT
TO ECHO ALL THE COMMENTS THAT
HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE, BUT I
THINK IN PARTICULAR, WHEN IT
COMES TO EMPLOYERS AND WORKERS,
WE'RE AT A CRITICAL TIME FRAME,
I CAN, YOU KNOW, BALANCE, HELP
BALANCE THE STATE BUDGET, BUT I
DON'T KNOW HOW TO COUNT AVOCADOS
ON A SELF COUNTER. RIGHT. AND
NOR DO I WANT TO TAKE THE TIME
TO LEARN HOW TO DO THAT, AND SO
I SEE, ELDERLY FOLKS IN MY
COMMUNITY STRUGGLE WITH BUYING
GROCERIES BECAUSE THERE'S NO ONE
TO HELP THEM AT THE CHECKOUT.
AND THAT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING
THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED,
ESPECIALLY IN COMMUNITIES WHERE,
IN MY COMMUNITY, FOR EXAMPLE,
THIS WAS THE SECOND TIME, THAT
VOTERS GOT, A BALLOT TO VOTE BY
MAIL, AND STILL THERE'S NO
EDUCATION ON IT. SO IF VOTERS
CAN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO VOTE BY
MAIL, CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT IT'S
LIKE FOR THEM TO TRY TO CHECK
OUT THEIR OWN GROCERIES AT A
GROCERY STORE WHEN WE'RE
ALREADY, YOU KNOW, STRUGGLING IN
A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT ISSUES?
AND SO IT'S A CHALLENGE. MY, MY
WORK IN THE AI SPACE HAS BEEN
FOCUSED ON, ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE BEING USED IN
ELECTIONS AND HOW YOU KNOW, IT'S
VERY POSSIBLE FOR FAKE PEOPLE TO
BE CREATED ON A MAILER, ON A
DIGITAL AD, VOICES THAT AREN'T
REALLY A REAL PERSON. BUT YOU
GET A ROBO CALL AND YOU JUST
DON'T KNOW, LIKE, IF THAT'S A
REAL PERSON AND WE CURRENTLY
HAVE NO DISCLAIMERS ON WHAT THAT
COULD POTENTIALLY LOOK LIKE OR
THE INFLUENCE THAT THAT HAS. AND
SO WE'RE WE'RE WORKING ON POLICY
THAT'S MOVING, THAT'S MOVING
FORWARD IN THAT SPACE. BUT I
THINK IT'S REALLY DIFFICULT TO
PUT THE GENIE BACK IN THE
BOTTLE, AND SO NOW IT'S ABOUT
REGULATION AND HOW WE GET AHEAD
OF THAT. ALL THESE ISSUES THAT
ARE MOVING FORWARD. SO AGAIN,
INCREDIBLE, JUST INPUT I THINK
AS A LEGISLATURE MOVES FORWARD
AND TRIES TO FIGURE OUT AT THE
END OF THE DAY, HOW DO WE HOW DO
WE REGULATE SOMETHING THAT'S
ALREADY OUT, BUT DO IT IN A WAY
THAT'S THAT'S EFFICIENT, RIGHT.
AND THAT AT THE END OF THE DAY,
SUPPORTS SUPPORTS THE VISION OF
AN INFORMED STATE THAT CAN ALSO
INFORM THE REST OF THE NATION.
SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK. I
SHOULD SAY. OH, SORRY. SHE JUST
WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING. YEAH,
PLEASE. SORRY GRACIAS. SENORITA.
CARRILLO, POR ESCUCHAR EL
TESTIMONIO. SHE JUST WANTED TO
SAY THANK YOU. AS A MEMBER OF
CARRILLO FOR, LISTENING TO HER
TESTIMONY, I JUST WANTED TO ADD
ONE THING TO. I THINK THE
REMARKS THAT ASSEMBLYMEMBER
ERWIN MADE ABOUT UPSCALING,
WHICH WAS THE IMPORTANCE OF
THOSE CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN THE
WORKERS AND THE EMPLOYERS. I
ALSO THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT
THAT WE ENGAGE IN THAT AS
GOVERNMENT, THAT WE MAKE SURE
THAT WE ARE NOT FALLING ASLEEP
AT THE WHEEL IN PROVIDING
RESOURCES TO ENSURE THAT PEOPLE
HAVE THE SKILLS TO THRIVE IN THE
NEW ECONOMY. AND I THINK THAT
IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT EVEN
DURING HARD BUDGET TIMES, THOSE
ARE CONVERSATIONS THAT CONTINUE
WITH OUR PARTNERS IN LABOR AND
HOW WE CAN BE PUSHING THAT
FORWARD THROUGH OUR INCREDIBLE
INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE HERE IN
CALIFORNIA. ON THAT, I JUST
WANTED TO OH, GO AHEAD. JUST,
JUST JUST ONE QUICK IDEA THAT I
THINK, YOU KNOW, YOU TALKED
ABOUT HOW CAN WE, MAKE SURE THIS
IS, EFFICIENT AND IS WORKING IS
WORKING AND BRING THE WORKERS TO
THE TABLE, AND I THINK, YOU
KNOW, THEY COULD BE, LIKE, SORT
OF, KHÓ, DECISION MAKING OF
COMPANIES AND THEIR WORKERS,
THAT YOU COULD PUT INTO
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS
THAT, YOU KNOW, WORKERS AND THE
UNION HAS THE SAME WEIGHT OF,
SAY, WHICH TECHNOLOGY WILL BE
USED. AND THAT, FIRST OF ALL, IT
HAS TO BE DISCLOSED THAT THIS
TECHNOLOGY IS BEING USED BECAUSE
THAT'S A PROBLEM THAT DOESN'T
HAPPEN. AND THEN SECONDLY, THEY
HAVE TO AGREE THAT THIS
PARTICULAR TECHNOLOGY IS BEING
USED. AND I THINK A GOOD MODEL
MIGHT BE, YOU KNOW, AS I SAID,
I'M ORIGINALLY FROM GERMANY AND
THERE IS A WORKERS COUNCIL THAT
ANY COMPANY THAT IS LARGER THAN
FIVE PEOPLE, IT'S NOT NOTHING TO
DO WITH UNION. THEY CAN VOTE FOR
A WORKERS COUNCIL AND THERE'S A
LAW IN GERMANY, IT'S A SECTION
86IN THE LAW THAT SAYS ANY
TECHNOLOGY NEEDS TO BE, KHÓ
DECIDED BY THE LEADERSHIP OF THE
COMPANY AND THE WORKERS COUNCIL,
WHICH IS, YOU KNOW, LIKE A FEW
PEOPLE THAT ARE THAT ARE VOTED
IN BY ALL OF THE WORKERS IN THIS
COMPANY, AND I THINK YOU CAN SEE
WHAT'S KIND OF INTERESTING IS
LIKE THE WORST OF THE
SURVEILLANCE TECHNOLOGY HAS BEEN
PUSHED OUT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS
NO INDIVIDUAL MONITORING OF
WAREHOUSE WORKERS IN MOST OF
GERMANY BECAUSE THE WORKERS HAVE
SAID NO. THEY SAID, YOU CAN,
LIKE, LOOK AT OUR TEAMS, HOW
PRODUCTIVE WE ARE, BUT WE ARE
NOT ALLOWING THAT. YOU TRACK ONE
OF EACH OF US AND FIRE US
BECAUSE WE ARE UNDER LIKE SORT
OF SOME SORT OF PRODUCTIVITY
ALGORITHM. JUST AN IDEA. THANK
YOU, I JUST AGAIN, I WANT TO
QUICKLY JUST KIND OF ECHO WHAT,
MY CHAIR, THE OTHER CHAIR,
MENTIONED IN TERMS OF WHAT WE'VE
BEEN WATCHING IN PRIVACY, IN THE
PRIVACY AND CONSUMER COMMITTEE,
WHICH IS A LOT OF PROMISES, FROM
THE TECHNOLOGY WORK, YOU KNOW,
PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING THIS
TECHNOLOGY. AND WE LIKE TO TALK
ABOUT HOW WE'RE THE FIFTH
LARGEST ECONOMY IN THE WORLD.
AND A LOT OF THE TECHNOLOGY
THAT'S BEING USED IS BEING
CREATED HERE IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, BUT UNFORTUNATELY,
I'VE SEEN THE STORY, UP CLOSE
AND PERSONAL, WHERE WE ARE, A
LOT OF PROMISES ARE MADE, A LOT
OF STATE DOLLARS ARE USED TO,
YOU KNOW, ENHANCE THOSE
PROMISES. AND IN MY DISTRICT OR
NEXT TO MY DISTRICT, WE HAVE
TESLA, WHERE ELON MUSK PROMISED
US, YOU KNOW, A NEW GREEN JOBS.
AND WHAT I'VE SEEN OVER AND OVER
IS THOSE WORKERS COMING TO ME
AND TALKING ABOUT THE INJUSTICES
THAT ARE HAPPENING IN THE PLANT
AND THEIR INABILITY TO EVEN
PURCHASE ONE OF THOSE TESLAS
THAT THEY'RE MAKING EVERY SINGLE
DAY. AND SO, YOU KNOW, WHAT I
DON'T WANT US TO DO IS TO
CONTINUE TO WAIT, TO SEE WHAT
HAPPENS OR TO DEPEND ON THE
PROMISES THAT ARE BEING MADE TO
CONSUMERS, TO US, TO WORKERS,
THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE TAKEN
CARE OF. AND THEN WE FIND OUT
LATER THAT THEY'RE NOT JUST LIKE
WE'RE FINDING OUT IN SOCIAL
MEDIA, WHERE WE YOU HEAR EVERY
DAY THE HORROR STORIES ABOUT
WHAT'S HAPPENING TO OUR YOUTH,
AND THEN WE HEAR THE COMPANIES
COME IN AND PROMISE US THAT
THEY'RE GOING TO FIX IT, OR THAT
THEY'RE FIXING IT. AND WE DON'T
SEE THE RESULTS OF THAT, SO WITH
THAT, I WANT TO UNLESS THERE'S
OTHER QUESTIONS. OKAY. I WANT TO
PASS IT OVER TO I WANT TO THANK
OUR PANELISTS. MUCHAS GRACIAS.
AND CALLING OUR THIRD AND FINAL
PANEL. THANK YOU. SO OUR THIRD
PANEL, WE HAVE, SPEAKING WILL BE
SAG-AFTRA NATIONAL BOARD MEMBER.
AND ACTOR. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF
BUZZ ABOUT OUR NEXT PANELIST,
SEAN ASTON, PLEASE, ANY CHAIR,
ANY CHAIR, ANDREW. GINA,
RESEARCH DIRECTOR FOR THE
AMALGAMATED, AMALGAMATED TRANSIT
UNION AND SANDRA BARREDO,
GOVERNMENT RELATIONS ADVOCATE
WITH SEIU CALIFORNIA. I DO.
WHENEVER YOU ARE READY, YEAH.
ALL RIGHT. WELL. FIRST TIME
HERE, THANK YOU. CHAIR ORTEGA
AND VICE CHAIR FLORA, MEMBERS OF
THE ASSEMBLY, LABOR AND,
CONSUMER PROTECTION AND PRIVACY
COMMITTEES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
TO MY FELLOW PARTICIPANTS,
ATTENDEES FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO
SHARE WITH YOU ALL. TODAY. I
WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE MY SAG-AFTRA
UNION. FELLOW MEMBERS FROM THE
LOS ANGELES, LOCAL GOVERNMENT
AFFAIRS AND PUBLIC POLICY
COMMITTEE AND THE REST OF OUR
HELPERS, SHANE GUZMAN, WHO YOU
GUYS KNOW, MY NAME IS SEAN
ASTON, AND I AM A PROFESSIONAL
ACTOR, BUT MY APPEARANCE HERE
TODAY IS ROOTED IN THE FACT THAT
I WAS ELECTED BY THE MEMBERS OF
MY UNION TO SERVE ON OUR
NATIONAL BOARD, REPRESENTING
160,000 MEMBERS NATIONWIDE AND
ON MY LOS ANGELES LOCAL BOARD,
REPRESENTING 80,000 MEMBERS. AND
IF YOU ADD IN OUR SAN DIEGO
LOCAL AND OUR SAN FRANCISCO
LOCAL FROM THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ABOUT 90,000
MEMBERS, AS YOU CAN IMAGINE,
WHEN IT COMES TO ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE, ALL OF OUR MEMBERS
ARE EXTREMELY CONCERNED AND WITH
GOOD REASON. WE'RE ALREADY
FEELING THE UNSETTLING EFFECTS
OF THIS TECHNOLOGY IN OUR DAILY
LIVES AND ON OUR LIVELIHOODS.
MORE THAN THAT, OUR DIGNITY IS
UNDER ASSAULT. I WANT TO SHARE
TWO CONCEPTS THAT I THINK ARE
BOTH TRUE. FIRST, THERE ARE
TIMES THROUGHOUT HUMAN HISTORY
WHEN TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES
CHANGED THE VERY NATURE OF OUR
EXPERIENCE AS HUMAN BEINGS.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS
CLEARLY OBVIOUSLY JUST THAT TEN
YEARS FROM NOW, THE WAY WE LIVE
WILL HAVE CHANGED IN WAYS WE
CAN'T EVEN IMAGINE RIGHT NOW.
TWO SOMETIMES PRODUCTS OR
SYSTEMS COME ALONG THAT CHANGE
CONSUMER DEMAND, RENDERING
EARLIER TECHNOLOGY OBSOLETE.
THAT IS NOT WHAT IS HAPPENING
HERE. THIS IS NOT A BUGGY WHIP
SITUATION WHERE THEY WERE MADE
REDUNDANT BY THE ADVENT OF
AUTOMOBILES. THIS IS MORE AKIN
TO HORSE THIEVERY OR CARJACKING.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IS
EXCITING. IT'S WONDERFUL. THESE
COMPANIES ARE DRIVING NOT JUST
INNOVATION, BUT JOBS. OUR
ECONOMY. WE LOVE OUR TECH
COMPANIES, BUT THE UNETHICAL USE
OF THEIR INNOVATIONS MUST BE
IDENTIFIED. THIS HEARING HAS
BEEN AN EYE POPPING,
CONSIDERATION OF JUST SOME OF
THE THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING.
THE UNETHICAL USE OF THESE
INNOVATIONS HAVE TO BE
IDENTIFIED AND STOPPED AT ALL
COST. TECH COMPANIES, LARGE AND
SMALL. THE STUDIOS, NETWORKS AND
STREAMERS ARE NOT RESPONDING TO
MARKET FORCES. THEIR TECHNOLOGY
ADVENTURISM IS NURTURING A
SYSTEMATIC DISMANTLING OF OUR
PROFESSION, WHERE MAINTAINING A
CAREER IS NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE FOR
MOST OF OUR PEOPLE, 10% QUALIFY
FOR HEALTH INSURANCE EACH YEAR,
10% OF THAT 160,000. WHERE ONCE
A PERFORMER COULD ACHIEVE A
MIDDLE CLASS EXISTENCE AND THEIR
SHARE OF THE AMERICAN DREAM,
THEY ARE NOW UNNECESSARILY
FORCED TO APPROACH THE INDUSTRY
AS GIG WORKERS. SAG-AFTRA, ALONG
WITH THE WRITERS GUILD, IATSE,
THE TEAMSTERS AND OTHER SISTER
ENTERTAINMENT TRADE UNIONS, ARE
THE CANARIES IN THE COAL MINE.
WE ARE AMONG THE FIRST TO
CONFRONT THIS PARTICULAR THREAT
WHERE, IN THE CASE OF OUR
PERFORMERS, OUR IDENTITIES ARE
BEING SIPHONED AWAY FROM US. OUR
PERFORMERS ARE THE FIRST TO HAVE
OUR NAMES, LIKENESSES, VOICES
AND BODY MOVEMENTS ABUSED BY
THIS TECHNOLOGY. BUT WE ARE IN
THE VANGUARD. LAST YEAR OUR
HISTORIC 118 DAY STRIKE. LED THE
WAY IN THE LABOR MOVEMENT. OUR
118 DAY STRIKE WAS OUR
MEMBERSHIP, SAYING NO. THEY
DEMANDED THAT WE DO SOMETHING,
ANYTHING TO ADDRESS THIS
EXISTENTIAL THREAT TO OUR
COMMUNITY. SOME ADVOCATED FOR A
TOTAL PROHIBITION ON ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE AND DIGITAL
REPLICATION. WHEN THIS COULDN'T
BE ACHIEVED, WE ZEROED IN ON
THREE CORE TENETS OF HOW OUR
PEOPLE ARE RELATED AND RELATING
TO THIS TECHNOLOGY, SOME OF
WHICH HAS BEEN INDICATED.
CONSENT COMPENSATION AND USAGE.
THE LANGUAGE WE ACHIEVED IN THE
CONTRACT WAS GROUNDBREAKING AS
FAR AS IT WENT, BUT NOW, AS WE
ARE INUNDATED WITH DEVELOPMENTS
AND ADVANCEMENTS THAT WE KNEW
WERE COMING, THAT COULDN'T YET
BE ADDRESSED IN BARGAINING, WE
ARE EXISTING IN THAT AWKWARD
SPACE OF WAITING FOR ANOTHER TWO
YEARS IN OUR CONTRACT CYCLE TO
PLAY OUT, DURING WHICH TIME THE
INCREDIBLE SPEED OF ADVANCEMENTS
WON'T BE ABLE TO BE CHALLENGED.
THE AVERAGE MEMBER IS CAUGHT
BETWEEN UNDERSTANDING THE REAL
LIFE IMPLICATIONS OF THE
AGREEMENT. WE REACHED AND THE
CONTRACT ENFORCEMENT, WHICH
FEELS PRETTY DISTANT AS THE
COMPANIES TEST THE BOUNDARIES OF
THE GOOD FAITH PORTIONS OF THE
AGREEMENT IN WAYS THAT
THROUGHOUT AMERICAN HISTORY, BIG
BUSINESS HAS OFTEN DONE WITH
LITTLE CARE FOR THE HUMAN BEINGS
THEY HIRE. FOR EXAMPLE, PER THE
CONTRACT, THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO
GIVE OUR PEOPLE THREE DAYS
NOTICE BEFORE REQUIRING A
DECISION TO BE MADE REGARDING
CONSENTING TO THE DIGITAL
REPLICAS OR USE OF ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE. THEY ARE SUPPOSED
TO GIVE US A SEPARATE, CLEAR AND
CONSPICUOUS CONSENT DOCUMENT
WITH A REASONABLE DESCRIPTION OF
HOW THEY INTEND TO USE IT. WELL,
THEY ARE NOT HONORING THE SPIRIT
OR THE LETTER OF THAT AGREEMENT
IN CASES WE HAVE EVIDENCE OF
THEM REQUIRING EVERY PERFORMER
TO SIGN OFF WITHOUT OFFERING
SOMETIMES WHAT THEIR TIME,
ADVANCED TIME THAT THEY'RE
SUPPOSED TO, BUT ALSO WITHOUT
OFFERING THE INFORMATION AS TO
WHAT THEY INTEND TO DO WITH IT.
YOU CAN IMAGINE THE COMPLEXITY
AND THE PRACTICALITY OF
ENFORCING THAT RULE. SO OUR
MEMBERS ARE ASKING, WAIT, IF
YOU'RE GOING TO REQUIRE MY
CONSENT, EVEN WHEN YOU HAVE NO
EXPECTATION OF USING IT, WHY ARE
YOU DOING THAT? THEY HAVE
REASONABLE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT
SORT OF BIOMETRIC DATA IS BEING
CAPTURED, HOW IT'S BEING STORED,
AND TO WHAT EXTENT THEY'RE USING
IT BEYOND THE SPIRIT AND MAYBE
EVEN THE LETTER OF OUR
AGREEMENT, OUR MEMBERS ARE LEFT
TO WONDER WHAT KINDS OF BIAS ARE
HAPPENING IN THE HIRING PROCESS.
OUR UNION IS POWERFUL, AND WE
ENFORCE THE PROVISIONS OF OUR
CONTRACTS. BUT GIVEN THE SIZE
AND NATURE AND SCOPE OF THE
CHALLENGE, WE HAVE, WE NEED YOUR
HELP. ONLY GOVERNMENT HAS THE
ABILITY TO IMPOSE SUFFICIENT
ENOUGH CONSEQUENCES IN THE ONLY
LANGUAGE THESE BIG COMPANIES
UNDERSTAND MONEY. I'M NOT GOING
TO BRING UP SPECIFIC
LEGISLATION, THOUGH. DOZENS OF
STATES AND THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT ARE MANAGING A
PLETHORA OF BILLS. WHAT I WOULD
SAY ABOUT THE DYNAMIC, I JUST
DESCRIBED IS THAT WE NEED IS
THAT FOR ME? MY WIFE PUSHED THAT
BUTTON. I'M SURE OF IT, A COUPLE
MORE PAGES OR NO? IS THAT OKAY?
ALL RIGHT. YEAH. WHAT I WOULD
SAY ABOUT THE DYNAMIC I JUST
DESCRIBED IS THAT WE NEED AN
INFORMED CONSENT LANGUAGE BILL
OF RIGHTS, NOT JUST FOR US, BUT
FOR ALL PEOPLE. THIS WOULD BE
ONE TOOL TO HELP PREVENT OR DEAL
WITH DEEP FAKES THAT CAN
TERRORIZE ANYONE, INCLUDING
LEGISLATORS. MADE TO LOOK AS
THOUGH YOU ARE BEHAVING IN WAYS
YOU WOULDN'T BEHAVE OR
SUPPORTING POSITIONS YOU
WOULDN'T SUPPORT. I'LL FINISH
WITH WHAT I BELIEVE THE BIGGEST
AI ISSUE IS FACING OUR INDUSTRY
AND OUR MEMBERS. THE TECH
COMPANIES MAKE AN AUDACIOUS
CLAIM THAT DOESN'T PASS THE
SMELL TEST. THEY ASSERT THAT
WHEN DIGITAL INFORMATION IS
INGESTED INTO THEIR LARGE
LANGUAGE MODELS, IT ALL GOES
INTO A BLACK BOX. THE CHARACTERS
AND INFORMATION GO THROUGH SOME
MAGICAL, MYSTICAL, UNKNOWABLE
TRANSMOGRIFICATION SUCH THAT
WHEN IT COMES OUT ON THE OTHER
SIDE, THERE'S NO TRACE OF ITS
DIGITAL ORIGIN. OUR ABILITY TO
POLICE THEIR USAGE IS
IMPOSSIBLE. PERFORMERS ARE LEFT
TO SCOUR THE KNOWN UNIVERSE AND
LOOK WITH A MAGNIFYING GLASS TO
SEE HOW MUCH OF THEIR NOSE OR
WHAT NOTES OF THEIR VOICES, OR
HOW A PERSON OR A CREATURE
MOVING IS THEM. I BELIEVE IN
THIS CASE, WE ARE DEALING WITH
DISHONEST BROKERS. WE NEED THE
FULL WEIGHT OF THE LAW TO LEVEL
THE PLAYING FIELD, BECAUSE WHERE
THE LIMITS OF BARGAINING
BARGAINING END, ONLY YOU CAN
HOLD THEM TO ACCOUNT. WE MUST
ESTABLISH PROVENANCE. WE MUST
PROTECT THE CHAIN OF TITLE TO
OUR IDENTITIES. ANYTHING LESS.
AND OUR PEOPLE FEEL AS THOUGH A
PIECE OF OUR SOUL HAS BEEN
TAKEN. WE FEEL VIOLATED. OUR
IDENTITY IS WHO WE ARE. IT'S THE
VESSEL THAT HOLDS OUR REPUTATION
AND THE EMBLEM OF OUR VALUE. IN
2005, THE INDUSTRY STANDARD WAS
TO ADD WATERMARKS TO ALL FILMED
ENTERTAINMENT. IN THIS WAY, THEY
CUT DOWN ON PIRACY WHEN IT'S IN
THEIR INTEREST TO PROTECT THEIR
PRODUCTS. THEY ARE TECH GENIUSES
WHEN IT COMES TO PROTECTING OUR
PRODUCT. OUR VERY SELVES. THEY
PRETEND THEY JUST DON'T KNOW
WHAT TO DO. WE DEMAND THAT ALL
DATA THAT CONTAINS OUR IMAGE,
VOICE, LIKENESS, MOVEMENTS, AND
OTHER CRITICAL INFORMATION
UNIQUE TO US, SUCH AS OUR UNION
NUMBER MEMBER NUMBER, BE
CAPTURED, EMBEDDED AND PROTECTED.
WHETHER IT'S THROUGH BLOCKCHAIN
OR OTHER TECHNOLOGY. WE'RE
ENTITLED TO KNOW HOW WE ARE
BEING USED. I SINCERELY THANK
YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR YOUR LASER
FOCUS AND QUICK ACTION ON THIS
PROFOUND ISSUE OF PUBLIC IMPORT
THAT IS INCREDIBLY COMPLEX AND
OFTEN VERY DANGEROUS. THANK YOU.
THANK YOU. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS THAT I'M CAPABLE OF.
WE WILL DO THAT AFTER WE GO
THROUGH OUR NEXT PANELIST,
ANDREW. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON. CHAIRS ORTEGA
BAUER-KAHAN AND MEMBERS OF THE
COMMITTEES. MY NAME IS ANDREW.
GINA. I'M THE DIRECTOR OF
STRATEGIC RESEARCH FOR THE
AMALGAMATED TRANSIT UNION. WE
ARE THE LARGEST LABOR UNION
REPRESENTING PUBLIC TRANSIT AND
ALLIED WORKERS IN THE US. AND
CANADA. WE HAVE ALMOST 200,000
MEMBERS, INCLUDING TRANSIT,
PARATRANSIT, SCHOOL AND
INTERSTATE BUS OPERATORS,
SUBWAY, LIGHT RAIL AND STREETCAR
OPERATORS, MECHANICS,
MAINTENANCE EMPLOYEES, AND OTHER
RELATED CLASSIFICATIONS. IN THE
US, ATU MEMBERS WORK IN 44
STATES AND THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA. HERE IN SACRAMENTO,
LOCAL 256 REPRESENTS BUS,
PARATRANSIT, MICROTRANSIT, AND
LIGHT RAIL OPERATORS EMPLOYED BY
THE REGIONAL TRANSIT DISTRICT.
ATU MEMBERS PLAY A VITAL,
IRREPLACEABLE ROLE IN THE
DELIVERY OF PUBLIC TRANSIT. THEY
WORK DILIGENTLY DAY IN AND DAY
OUT, ENSURING THAT RIDERS GET
WHERE THEY NEED TO BE. WORK,
SCHOOL, THE DOCTOR, THE GROCERY
STORE SAFELY AND ON TIME. OUR
UNION ENSURES THAT JOBS IN THE
INDUSTRY PROVIDE MULTI-DECADE
CAREERS WITH GOOD WAGES AND
BENEFITS, AS WELL AS OPPORTUNITY,
SECURITY AND DIGNITY FOR TRANSIT
WORKERS. AS WITH OTHER
INDUSTRIES, PUBLIC TRANSIT FACES
AN ONRUSH OF NEW TECHNOLOGY. OUR
TASK IS TO SHAPE INNOVATION SUCH
THAT IT ENHANCES THE LIVES OF
OUR MEMBERS AND THE COMMUNITIES
IN WHICH THEY WORK AND LIVE.
SOME TECHNOLOGIES, LIKE ADVANCED
DRIVER ASSISTANCE SYSTEMS, COULD
MAKE WORK SAFER AND LESS
STRESSFUL. HOWEVER, THESE
SYSTEMS MUST BE CALIBRATED
APPROPRIATELY TO PROVIDE
ACCURATE INFORMATION THAT AVOIDS
COGNITIVE OVERLOAD OF OPERATORS.
IT IS CRITICAL THAT
MANUFACTURERS SEEK INPUT FROM
OUR MEMBERS AS THE END USERS OF
THESE SYSTEMS. SUCCESSFUL
TEAMING OF SKILLED HUMANS AND
AUTOMATED SYSTEMS CREATED AN
IMPRESSIVE SAFETY RECORD FOR
AVIATION, AND WE THINK THAT
APPROACH COULD BE ADAPTED FOR
PUBLIC TRANSIT. BUT IN A BID TO
CAPTURE MARKET SHARE,
CORPORATIONS ARE PUSHING
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE TECHNOLOGY AS
FAR AND AS FAST AS THEY POSSIBLY
CAN WITH LITTLE REGARD FOR
WORKERS IN THE PUBLIC. FROM 40
FOOT BUSSES TO MICROTRANSIT
VANS, COMPANIES ARE TRYING TO
DEVELOP AND MARKET AUTONOMOUS
TRANSIT VEHICLES OF ALL SIZES
WITHOUT FIRST ENSURING THEIR
SAFETY AND EFFECTIVENESS.
COMPANIES MAKE UNSUPPORTED
CLAIMS ABOUT POTENTIAL COST
SAVINGS THROUGH LABOR
ELIMINATION, IMPROVED SAFETY AND
IMPROVED QUALITY OF SERVICE.
OFTEN, REALITY IS LESS
IMPRESSIVE AND POSSIBLY MORE
EXPENSIVE. WE'VE SEEN SMALL
SHUTTLES THAT CAN SEAT SIX,
TRAVEL ABOUT 12MPH, REQUIRE
ONBOARD ATTENDANTS AND REMOTE
VEHICLE OPERATORS. WE'VE SEEN
MICROTRANSIT VANS THAT CAN ONLY
DRIVE ON SPECIFICALLY MAPPED
STREETS AND STILL REQUIRE HUMAN
OPERATORS UNDER CERTAIN WEATHER
AND ROAD CONDITIONS. THESE ARE
JUST A FEW EXAMPLES, BUT IN A
SCRAMBLE FOR PUBLIC CONTRACTS,
PUBLICITY AND MARKET SHARE, AV
COMPANIES HAVE THRUST US INTO A
REAL TIME EXPERIMENT WITH
UNPROVEN TECHNOLOGY. THIS RAISES
CONCERNS ABOUT JOB SAFETY AND
QUALITY. QUALITY OF LIFE FOR
TENS OF THOUSANDS OF TRANSIT
WORKERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY, AS
WELL AS THE SAFETY OF PASSENGERS,
MOTORISTS, VULNERABLE ROAD USERS
AND PEDESTRIANS. A RECENT SURVEY
FOUND THAT TWO THIRDS OF
RESPONDENTS WERE ACTUALLY AFRAID
OF SELF-DRIVING VEHICLES, AND
FOR GOOD REASON WHETHER IT'S
BEING INVOLVED IN ACCIDENTS,
SOME OF WHICH HAVE BEEN FATAL.
DRAGGING A PEDESTRIAN CRASHING
INTO A TREE OR A TELEPHONE POLE,
ILLEGALLY DRIVING IN A BUS LANE,
INTERFERING WITH FIRST
RESPONDERS, BLOCKING
INTERSECTIONS OR FAILING TO
IDENTIFY CHILDREN, AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES AND AUTOMATED STEERING
SYSTEMS HAVE SHOWN THAT THEY ARE
UNPREDICTABLE AND UNSAFE. IN
CONTRAST, PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION
IS TEN TIMES SAFER THAN
TRAVELING BY CAR, ACCORDING TO
THE AMERICAN PUBLIC
TRANSPORTATION ASSOCIATION.
SELF-SERVING SAFETY CLAIMS
COMING FROM AV COMPANIES SHOULD
BE TREATED WITH SKEPTICISM. WHEN
WE KNOW THAT THE SAFEST
TRANSPORTATION TRANSPORTATION
OPTION IS TO SIMPLY TAKE THE
BUS. WHILE THE AV INDUSTRY'S
MARKETING MIGHT BE ATTRACTIVE TO
CASH STRAPPED AGENCIES, FACING
WORKER SHORTAGES, TRANSIT
LEADERS AND LAWMAKERS AT ALL
LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT SHOULD
RESPONSIBLY USE PUBLIC MONEY TO
SUPPORT PROVEN MODES OF MASS
TRANSIT, RATHER THAN INDULGE IN
QUESTIONABLE AV PROJECTS.
INVESTMENTS SHOULD BE MADE IN
JOB QUALITY TO OVERCOME THE
OPERATOR SHORTAGE AND GUARANTEE
RELIABLE SERVICE. TO THAT END,
ATU HAS TAKEN A LEADING ROLE IN
DEVELOPING JOINT LABOR
MANAGEMENT, WORKFORCE
DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS AND
REGISTERED APPRENTICESHIPS TO
ATTRACT AND RETAIN WORKERS,
PARTICULARLY RIGHT HERE IN THE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA. AS WE
GRAPPLE WITH THE CHALLENGES
PRESENTED BY NEW TECHNOLOGY, WE
ARE LOOKING AT STATE AND FEDERAL
LEGISLATION AS ONE AREA OF
ACTION. NOT SURPRISINGLY, WE
HAVE MET RESISTANCE FROM THE
INDUSTRY, INCLUDING THE
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE INDUSTRY
ASSOCIATION, WHICH IS SUPPORTED
BY GOOGLE, AMAZON, GENERAL
MOTORS, FORD, UBER, UPS, AMONG
OTHERS. DESPITE THAT OPPOSITION,
WE HAVE HAD SOME SUCCESS. FOR
EXAMPLE, ATU WAS HAPPY TO
ENDORSE CALIFORNIA'S AB SIX,
WHICH WAS ENACTED LAST YEAR, AND
THAT LEGISLATION REQUIRES
TRANSIT AGENCIES TO ADDRESS
IMPORTANT ISSUES THROUGH
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING, INCLUDING
ADVANCED NOTICE OF AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLE PROJECTS AND TRANSITION
PLANS FOR WORKERS AFFECTED BY
NEW TECHNOLOGY. AB 96 ALSO
REQUIRES BARGAINING OVER
RETRAINING AND UPSKILLING FOR
WORKERS, SOMETHING WE HAVE SO
FAR NOT SEEN THE INDUSTRY TAKE
SERIOUSLY. THIS IS A GOOD
STARTING POINT, BUT ATU IS
FUNDAMENTAL. POSITION IS THAT IN
THE INTEREST OF SAFETY, A
PROPERLY LICENSED OPERATOR
SHOULD ALWAYS BE ON BOARD A
TRANSIT VEHICLE AND ENGAGED IN
ITS OPERATION, REGARDLESS OF
AUTOMATION LEVEL OR SIZE. WE ARE
EAGER TO SUPPORT LEGISLATION
THAT STATES THIS OUTRIGHT. IN
MARYLAND, FOR EXAMPLE, WE
SUPPORTED LEGISLATION THAT WOULD
HAVE REQUIRED A HUMAN OPERATOR
ON BOARD ANY AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE
OPERATED BY OR FOR A PUBLIC
ENTITY PROVIDING PUBLIC TRANSIT
SERVICE. WE HOPE TO BRING THAT
LEGISLATION BACK UP NEXT SESSION
AND PURSUE SIMILAR BILLS IN
OTHER STATES. GENERALLY, WE ARE
WORKING WITH ALLIES ACROSS THE
COUNTRY TO SUPPORT A VARIETY OF
REGULATORY BILLS. SOME EXAMPLES
INCLUDE MANDATES FOR PUBLIC DATA
SHARING AND GRANTING
MUNICIPALITIES REGULATORY
AUTHORITY OVER AV DEPLOYMENTS.
WE ARE ALSO OPPOSING BILLS THAT
ALLOW UNREGULATED OPERATION OF
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES ON PUBLIC
ROADS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL. WE
ARE PARTNERING WITH
REPRESENTATIVE CHUY GARCIA ON A
BILL THAT WOULD SIGNIFICANTLY
RESTRICT RECIPIENTS OF FTA
FUNDING FROM OPERATING OR
CONTRACTING FOR THE OPERATION OF
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES, REGARDLESS
OF THEIR SIZE, UNTIL THE
SECRETARY OF TRANSPORTATION CAN
ESTABLISH A ROBUST SAFETY
FRAMEWORK THAT INCLUDES VEHICLE
CAPABILITY TESTING, HUMAN
MACHINE INTERFACE STANDARDS, AND
VEHICLE SAFETY OPERATOR
TRAINING, AND DATA TRANSPARENCY.
A STANDARDIZED SAFETY FRAMEWORK
IS ESSENTIAL FOR SAFE DEPLOYMENT
OF THIS TECHNOLOGY AND IS
CURRENTLY BEING OVERLOOKED. ATU
STRONGLY SUPPORTS FEDERAL
REGULATION OF AUTONOMOUS
VEHICLES AND PUBLIC TRANSIT TO
AVOID A PATCHWORK OF DIFFERING
REGULATIONS ACROSS THE STATES.
ULTIMATELY, WE ARE FOCUSED ON
THE CRITICAL SAFETY IMPLICATIONS
OF UNCHECKED AV DEPLOYMENTS AND
THE IMPACT ON GOOD MASS TRANSIT
POLICY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON,
CHAIRS AND MEMBERS SANDRA
BORRERO I'M A GOVERNMENTAL
RELATIONS ADVOCATE FOR SEIU
CALIFORNIA, BUT I'M HERE TODAY
ON BEHALF OF SEIU 1000 AND OTHER
STATE WORKERS. SEIU 1000
REPRESENTS NEARLY 100,000
WORKERS WHO PROVIDE SERVICES
THROUGHOUT THE STATE, INCLUDING
TECHNICAL, ADMINISTRATIVE,
CLERICAL, COMMUNICATION AND
RESEARCH SUPPORT. THESE WORKERS
ARE INTIMATELY FAMILIAR WITH
STATE TECHNOLOGY, TECHNOLOGY AND
DATABASES BECAUSE IT IS PART OF
THEIR DAILY LIVES. SO FIRST, I'D
LIKE TO CORRECT THE STEREOTYPE
THAT STATE WORKERS OR UNIONS ARE
ANTI-TECH IF THERE'S HESITANCY
AROUND THE GOVERNOR'S, I
EXECUTIVE ORDER, IT'S BASED ON
STATE WORKERS FIRST HAND
EXPERIENCE WITH PREVIOUS
MODERNIZATION PROJECTS THAT
EITHER FAILED OR CREATED
SIGNIFICANT DISRUPTIONS TO
PUBLIC SERVICE. SO, FOR EXAMPLE,
FISCAL WAS LAUNCHED IN 2005.
STATE AGENCIES STILL STRUGGLE TO
USE IT, THE SAME GOES FOR CAL
NGUYEN, CAL SAU, AND THE EDD
PROGRAM THAT DELAYED BENEFITS
DURING THE PANDEMIC. WHEN TECH
FAILS, IT'S THE WORKERS WHO
SUFFER BLAME AND THE WRATH OF
THE FRUSTRATED CONSUMER WHO
FEELS LIKE THEY'VE BEEN GIVEN
THE RUNAROUND BY AN ENDLESSLY
LOOPING CHAT BOT. SO, AND
REMEMBER JUST THIS YEAR, 10,000
STATE WORKER POSITIONS WERE
ELIMINATED BECAUSE OF A BUDGET
DEFICIT. AT THE SAME TIME, THE
GOVERNOR'S EXECUTIVE ORDER
DIRECTS THE STATE TO EXPLORE A
TECHNOLOGY THAT PURPORTS TO
REPLACE HUMAN WORKERS. SO I
THINK GIVING THIS CONTEXT AND
GIVEN THE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS
OF DOLLARS SPENT ON PREVIOUS
MODERNIZATION PROJECTS, A
HEALTHY DOSE OF SKEPTICISM IS
WARRANTED. THE GOAL SHOULD NEVER
BE TO REPLACE THE HUMAN ELEMENT
IN GOVERNMENT. IF AI SYSTEMS ARE
INTENDED TO SUPPORT, RATHER THAN
REPLACE HUMAN WORKERS, FRONT
LINE WORKERS MUST BE CONSIDERED
AS END USERS AND TO SUCCEED
WHERE PREVIOUS MODERNIZATION
EFFORTS HAVE FAILED. THE END
USER NEEDS TO BE INCORPORATED
FROM THE EARLIEST STAGES OF
ADOPTION AND REMAIN ENGAGED
THROUGH TESTING, IMPLEMENTATION,
EVALUATION, AND DEVELOPMENT OF
WORKFORCE TRAINING. IT'S
FRONTLINE WORKERS WHO SHOULD BE
ANSWERING BASIC QUESTIONS LIKE
DO WE NEED AN AI SOLUTION HERE?
WHAT PROBLEM ARE WE TRYING TO
SOLVE WITH THIS TECHNOLOGY? WHO
WILL WE SERVE AND WHAT ARE THE
SPECIAL NEEDS OF THAT
POPULATION? BY ANSWERING THESE
QUESTIONS, WORKERS MIGHT BE ABLE
TO IDENTIFY ALTERNATIVES SUCH AS
UPDATING EXISTING SYSTEMS THAT
ARE CHEAPER, CAUSE FEWER
DISRUPTIONS, AND REQUIRE LESS
EXTENSIVE WORKFORCE TRAINING.
AND THIS DETERMINATION ALONE
COULD SAVE THE STATE MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS AND PREVENT DISRUPTIONS
TO SERVICES. CONVERSATIONS ABOUT
WORKFORCE TRAINING RIGHT NOW
TEND TO EVOLVE AROUND BASIC
OPERATIONS, BUT, WE WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT THERE'S A FEW OTHER
AREAS THAT DOES DESERVE CAREFUL
ATTENTION. I HEARD TALK ABOUT
UPSKILLING, BUT I THINK WE ALSO
WANT TO LOOK AT PREVENTING
DE-SKILLING. SO DE-SKILLING
OCCURS WHEN A TECHNOLOGY
REPLACES A SKILL OR FUNCTION
PREVIOUSLY PERFORMED BY A HUMAN,
AND THE END RESULT IS LOWER
WAGES. AND WE CAN TAKE THE
EXAMPLES OF APGA'S OR PROGRAM
ANALYSTS, WHICH ARE ONE OF THE
LARGEST CLASSIFICATIONS OF STATE
WORKERS, AND THEY SERVE IN
NEARLY EVERY DEPARTMENT. ONE OF
THEIR CORE FUNCTIONS IS
ANALYSIS, AND IT'S IN THEIR JOB
TITLE. BUT IF PROGRAM ANALYSTS
START RELYING ON AI TO PERFORM
THEIR JOBS, THEY'RE GOING TO BE
THE ANALYSIS GETS REPLACED WITH
INPUT AND EDITING AND INPUT, AND
EDITING ISN'T AS HIGHLY
COMPENSATED AS ANALYSIS. SO THAT
WOULD BE AN EXAMPLE OF
DE-SKILLING KIND OF NEAR AND
IMMEDIATE DE-SKILLING, WORKERS
ALSO NEED TO BE TRAINED ON THE
RISKS, RIGHT NOW, I DON'T THINK
THAT THE TRAININGS ARE GOING FAR
ENOUGH TO PROVIDE THAT
INFORMATION. AND WE'VE WE'RE ALL
FAMILIAR NOW. IT'S
DISCRIMINATION, PRIVACY AND
SECURITY. BECAUSE THE REALITY IS
THAT WHILE CHEN AI CAN SOUND
HUMAN, IT FREQUENTLY GENERATES
INACCURATE OR INAPPROPRIATE
OUTPUTS, SO TRAINING NEEDS TO
INCLUDE HOW TO MONITOR AND TAKE
PROTECTIVE MEASURES AGAINST
THESE POTENTIAL RISKS. AND THEN
LASTLY, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE
THAT WORKERS ARE PROVIDED
ONGOING TRAINING THAT MAKES SURE
THAT THEY CAN STILL PERFORM
THEIR JOB WHEN SYSTEMS FAIL.
REMEMBER, THE STAKES ARE MUCH
HIGHER FOR GOVERNMENT THAN
PRIVATE SECTOR. IF GOVERNMENT
SYSTEMS FAIL, PEOPLE COULD LOSE
THEIR JOBS OR THEIR HOMES. BUT
DESPITE CONCERNS, THERE'S STILL
A LOT OF EXCITEMENT OVER AI AND
THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THINGS
DIFFERENTLY, YOU KNOW, AI COULD
POSSIBLY HELP FINALLY ADDRESS
CHRONIC CASE LOAD ISSUES THAT
RESULT IN HIGH BURNOUT AND
TURNOVER FOR STATE WORKERS. OR
MAYBE I COULD FREE UP CAPACITY
FOR STATE WORKERS TO FOCUS ON
THE CORE FUNCTIONS THAT THAT
REALLY BRING THEM INTO STATE
SERVICE, AND IN THE PAST,
MODERNIZATION PROJECTS HAVEN'T
UTILIZED THE EXPERIENCE OF
FRONTLINE WORKERS DURING THE
SELECTION AND DESIGN PHASES OF
MODERNIZATION PROJECTS. BUT NOW
WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TAP
INTO THE RESOURCE OF MILLIONS OF
HOURS OF WORKER EXPERIENCE AND
USE IT TO IMPROVE THE LIVES OF
CALIFORNIANS, I HOPE THAT YOU
WILL CONSIDER OUR
RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONSIDER US
AS EQUAL PARTNERS AS WE MOVE
FORWARD. THANK YOU. GREAT JOB.
THANK YOU. ASSEMBLY MEMBER BRIAN,
OFFER FOR CONSIDERATION.
ACCEPTED. NO. I THINK WHAT'S
INTERESTING ABOUT THIS PANEL AND
THE PREVIOUS PANEL IS THAT WE
TEND TO THINK OF HOW INNOVATIONS
AND TECHNOLOGIES IMPACT WHAT WE
ARE WORKING ON, THE PEOPLE WE
REPRESENT. AND WHEN YOU COME TO
A SPACE LIKE THIS, YOU SEE THAT
ALL OF US SHARE AN
INTERCONNECTED STRUGGLE THAT
HITS US IN A DIFFERENT, NUANCED
WAY. BUT THE THEME THAT I'M
CATCHING IS THAT WE'RE NOT
AGAINST INNOVATION. THE STATE
SHOULDN'T BE AGAINST INNOVATION.
WE SHOULDN'T BE THE LEADER IN AI
ACROSS THE COUNTRY. BUT IT'S TO
SUPPORT A WORKFORCE. IT'S TO
SUPPORT OUR GROWING ECONOMY AND
INDUSTRIES, NOT TO REPLACE AND
SUPPLANT AND, SEAN, AS YOU
MENTIONED, IN SOME INDUSTRIES,
IT'S DIFFICULT TO SUPPORT
SOMETHING THAT'S SO UNIQUE AND
PROPRIETARY CREATIVE TO A PERSON.
IT'S THEFT, AND I THINK THAT'S
SOMETHING THAT'S INCREDIBLY
IMPORTANT FOR US TO THINK ABOUT
IN BOTH OF THESE COMMITTEES, HOW
WE WRAP OUR HANDS AROUND THAT,
HOW WE REGULATE THIS IN A WAY
THAT PROTECTS THE AUTHENTICITY,
OF THE INPUT THAT'S BEEN GIVEN
TO US BY THE FOLKS WHO ARE DOING
THE REAL WORK, AND SO THANK YOU
ALL FOR TESTIFYING FROM EACH OF
YOUR UNIQUE AND INDEPENDENT
PERSPECTIVES. AND ALSO, I KNOW
WE'RE WAITING. WE'RE WAITING FOR
THOSE FEDERAL REGULATIONS, BUT
IT'S ALSO NOT LOST ON US THAT AS
CALIFORNIA GOES, THE COUNTRY
GOES, AND SO WHATEVER WE CAN DO
TO BE A PART OF ADVANCING THIS
CONVERSATION IN A WAY THAT'S
MEANINGFUL, THIS INFORMATION IS
VALUABLE, BUT LEAN ON US AND
PUSH US TO DO THAT, BECAUSE
THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING.
CAN I JUST SAY THAT THEY CAN
AFFORD IT? YEAH. AND ALL LABOR
KNOWS THAT WHEN MANAGEMENT DOES
THE RIGHT THING, IT'S BETTER FOR
THEIR BOTTOM LINE. IT'S BETTER
FOR THE COMMUNITY. SO WE WANT TO
HELP THEM BE BETTER. AND YOU
GUYS CAN HELP US IN THAT. WE'VE
GOT YOUR BACK. AND ALSO THANK
YOU, FOR REMINDING ME THAT I AM
NOT THE ONLY PERSON HERE WHOSE
BUZZER TRAINED BY MY WIFE.
ASSEMBLYMEMBER'S CARILLO. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR, SHAWN, WE ALL
WANT TO KNOW WHERE YOU LIVE AND
WHO IS LIKE THE MEMBER THAT
REPRESENTS YOUR AREA. AND WHEN
THEY'RE TERMING OUT SO THAT
MAYBE YOU MIGHT CONSIDER,
RUNNING FOR OFFICE AT SOME POINT.
IS YOUR IS YOUR AREA? I DON'T
WANT TO TELL YOU, BECAUSE THAT
PERSON WILL THINK THAT, IT'S A
THREAT. SO YOU KNOW, I LIVE ALL
OVER CALABASAS IS WHERE I LIVE.
MY WIFE AND FAMILY, AND I LIVE.
I AM YOUR REPRESENTATIVE. THERE
YOU GO. SO IT'S NO THREAT? YEAH
I WILL, I HAVE, I'M SURE, JUST
OPENED UP A WHOLE OTHER CAN OF.
I KNOW ASSEMBLYMEMBERS CARILLO.
PLEASE. YOUR QUESTIONS. THANK
YOU, MADAM CHAIR, I SERVE. I
HAVE THE DISTINCT PLEASURE OF
SERVING ON THE CALIFORNIA FILM
COMMISSION AND LED THE EFFORTS
TO THE LAST EXTENSION OF THE
CALIFORNIA FILM TAX CREDIT
PROGRAM, AND ONE OF THE
CHALLENGES THAT WE FACE AS A
STATE, IS RUNAWAY PRODUCTION.
AND THE REALITY OF WHAT THAT
MEANS TO OUR ECONOMY, THE IMPACT
THAT IT HAS TO JOBS, GREAT UNION
JOBS, BUT AS WELL AS LOCAL
COMMUNITIES WHERE FILMING TAKES
PLACE IN CALIFORNIA. AND DESPITE
THE CHALLENGES FROM VARIOUS
OTHER STATES COMING IN WITH
ADDITIONAL TAX CREDIT PROGRAMS,
THAT THAT WE, THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, IS, FIGHTING AGAINST
AND HOPING TO SAVE THESE JOBS.
NOW THE INDUSTRY ITSELF IS
FACING CHALLENGES WITHIN THE
WORKERS. THE ACTORS VOICE OVER
TALENT, A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT
SECTORS IN WHICH ARTIFICIAL
INTELLIGENCE IS PLAYING A ROLE
IN WHAT THAT COULD POTENTIALLY
LOOK LIKE, BUT FROM AN AUDIENCE
PERSPECTIVE AS WELL. LIKE WHAT
IS IT THAT WE ARE RECEIVING AND
WHAT IS TRUTH AND WHAT IS NOT,
AND WHAT IS BEING MANIPULATED
WITH ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE? I
THINK, MADAM CHAIR, YOU HAVE A
BILL THAT ADDRESSES THAT ISSUE
AS WELL. AND SO IT'S AN
INTERESTING SPACE BECAUSE, YOU
KNOW, I BELIEVE THAT ART IS A
REFLECTION OF OUR SOCIETY AND
VICE VERSA. RIGHT? AND SO WHAT
WE CONSUME THE PRODUCTS THAT ARE
BEING CREATED, SAYS A LOT ABOUT
WHERE WE ARE, WHO WE ARE, AND
HOW WE GET TO MOVE FORWARD. AND
THERE'S IT'S DIFFICULT SOMETIMES
WHEN YOU'RE UP AGAINST,
INDUSTRIES AND YOU'RE UP AGAINST
INTERESTS THAT HAVE THEIR BOTTOM
LINE, YOU KNOW, AT THE
FOREFRONT. AND SO I THINK YOU
COMING UP HERE, I WANT YOU TO
KNOW AND YOUR FELLOW MEMBERS AT
SAG AND OTHER ENTERTAINMENT
UNIONS AND THE ENTERTAINMENT
UNION COALITION, YOU PLAY A
SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN ENSURING
THAT WE ARE MAKING APPROPRIATE
DECISIONS FROM THE CREATOR
PERSPECTIVE AS WELL, WHILE WE
MOVE POLICY FORWARD AND AGAIN,
LIKE TO THE OTHER UNIONS THAT
THAT ARE HERE AS WELL, LIKE THE
CONVERSATIONS WITH THE MEMBERS
AND HOW IT'S, IMPLEMENTED FROM
THE BOTTOM UP. RIGHT. YOU TAKE A
BUS, YOU'RE ON TRANSPORTATION,
YOU'RE WORKING, YOU CALL ED AND
YOU WANT, YOU KNOW, A MEMBER OF
SEIU 1000 TO BE ABLE TO HELP YOU,
IT ALL MATTERS. AND I THINK WE
AS A STATE ARE LACKING IN OUR
TECHNOLOGY. WE SAW THAT DURING
PANDEMIC, WHERE THE ED
INFRASTRUCTURE JUST DIDN'T WORK.
AND IT TOOK A LONG TIME FOR US
TO GET BACK ON TRACK. AND SO,
AGAIN, JUST WANT TO THANK ALL OF
YOU. AND I THINK WE'RE LISTENING
TO SOME VERY REAL AND HONEST
TESTIMONY THAT CAN LEAD THE
LEGISLATURE FORWARD AND CREATING
POLICIES THAT, AT THE END OF THE
DAY, SUPPORT CALIFORNIANS. THANK
THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU,
YOU KNOW, I THINK WHAT I ONE OF
THE THINGS I LOVE ABOUT THIS IS
I THINK WE HAVE TWO UNIONS
REPRESENTED HERE. WHO ACTUALLY
HAVE USED AI. RIGHT? EVERYONE
THINKS OF AI IS WHAT CAME OUT A
YEAR AGO, BUT AI IS A LOT OLDER
THAN THAT. AND I KNOW OUR STATE
WORKERS HAVE BEEN USING IT FOR A
LONG TIME AS IT RELATES TO CALL
CENTERS, AND ACTORS HAVE USED IT
IN WAYS THAT HAVE BENEFITED THEM
FOR A LONG TIME TO COVER THEM UP
IN NUDITY SCENES, ETC. AND SO I
THINK IT IS AN IMPORTANT POINT
THAT AI IS NOT EVEN AS NEW AS
PEOPLE THINK, AND THAT A LOT OF
OUR WORKERS HAVE BEEN ADOPTERS,
USERS, BENEFICIARIES FOR A LONG
TIME AND SO IT IS NOT AS IF WE
NEED TO TURN OUR BACK ON AI,
RIGHT? WE NEED TO LEARN HOW IT
HAS BEEN BENEFICIAL, CONTINUE TO
USE IT IN THOSE WAYS, AND NOT
ALLOW IT TO BE INTRODUCED IN
WAYS THAT ARE HUGELY PROBLEMATIC
TO OUR WORKERS. AND TO
CONSUMERS. AGAIN, AS MY
COLLEAGUE MENTIONED, AND I THINK
THAT'S REALLY CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT, I WANTED TO ASK, YOU
KNOW, IT'S FUNNY, AS WE TALK
ABOUT TRANSIT, I, NOW LIVE IN
THE SUBURBS. BUT WHEN I LIVED IN
SAN FRANCISCO, I DIDN'T HAVE A
CAR. I WAS A BIG BUS RIDER, WHEN
WE STARTED HAVING CONVERSATION
ABOUT THERE NOT BEING A DRIVER
ON A BUS, I ACTUALLY THOUGHT IT
WAS THE CRAZIEST THING I'D EVER
HEARD. BECAUSE AS A WOMAN RIDING
ALONE IN SAN FRANCISCO, I WAS
OFTEN NOT SAFE ON THE BUS.
RIGHT. AND SO THE IDEA THAT I
WOULD BE ON THERE AND THERE
WOULD NOT BE A CITY WORKER WAS
APPALLING TO ME. I THINK THERE
WAS A DISCUSSION AROUND SCHOOL
BUSSES. I WAS LIKE, I WOULDN'T
PUT MY KID ON A SCHOOL BUS
WITHOUT A WORKER. NOW, AGAIN,
IT'S AN INTERESTING IDEA ON
THOSE SAN FRANCISCO BUSSES. IF
THAT PERSON WOULD HAVE BEEN
POSITIONED TO HELP THE CONSUMERS
MORE, RIGHT. IF WE GET TO A
PLACE WHERE THE TECHNOLOGY IS
SUCH THAT THAT'S ABLE TO DO
THAT, BUT THE WORKER IS STILL
THERE, I THINK THAT'S EXCITING.
I'LL BE HONEST. I WAS IN
SITUATIONS WHERE THE DRIVER
COULDN'T TURN THEIR BACK ON THE
ROAD AND STUFF WAS HAPPENING IN
THE BACK OF THE BUS. THAT WAS
REALLY FRIGHTENING. I'LL BE
FRANK WITH YOU. RIGHT. AND I
THINK THAT'S TRUE FOR A LOT OF
CONSUMERS IN CALIFORNIA. AND I
THINK WE DON'T WANT TO PUT OUR
DRIVERS IN THAT POSITION, BUT
IT'S THE REALITY OF THEIR JOBS.
I MEAN, I THINK I DON'T KNOW IF
YOU WANT TO MENTION THAT, BUT I
DO THINK WHEN I PUT MY KID ON
THE SCHOOL BUS AND MY KID WRITES
A SCHOOL BUS EVERY DAY, I'M
PUTTING THEM IN THE HANDS OF
THAT DRIVER. RIGHT. AND I'M
ENTRUSTING THAT DRIVER TO GET MY
CHILD TO SCHOOL SAFELY, MY YOUNG
TEN YEAR OLD. SO, YOU KNOW, I DO
THINK THAT THESE FOLKS CARRY
ROLES BEYOND WHAT EVEN THE
TECHNOLOGY ANTICIPATES, RIGHT.
AND I THINK THAT'S CRITICALLY
IMPORTANT. WHEN THE WAYMO CAR
GOT LIT ON FIRE EARLIER THIS
YEAR IN THE MIDDLE OF CHINATOWN,
I THINK IT HIT THAT POINT HOME.
YOU CAN'T REALLY KEEP THESE
VEHICLES SAFE WHEN THEY'RE ON
THEIR OWN FROM WHEREVER THOSE
PEOPLE ARE THAT ARE MONITORING
THE CAMERAS IN THOSE CARS, AND
SO, YOU KNOW, I THINK AS YOU
MENTIONED, WE HAVE DONE SOME
THINGS TO THINK ABOUT HOW TO
BRING THE VOICES OF YOUR WORKERS
TO THE TABLE, AS WE LOOK AT THE
FUTURE OF TRANSIT, I REPRESENT A
DISTRICT WHERE WE ACTUALLY THE
REASON I NO LONGER AM A BUS
RIDERS, WE DON'T REALLY HAVE BUS
SERVICE. IT'S ACTUALLY A HUGE
PROBLEM WHERE I LIVE, WE HAVE A
HUGE LAST MILE PROBLEM AND WE
HAVE NO BUSSES TO TAKE PEOPLE TO
THE BART STATIONS, AND YOU KNOW,
SO I THINK THAT THE FUTURE OF
TRANSIT, I HOPE IT EXPANDS IN
COMMUNITIES LIKE MINE AND IN
OTHER COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BUS,
BUT NOT ENOUGH SERVICE FOR THE
WORKERS THAT WORK HOURS THAT ARE
NON TRADITIONAL, IF YOU WILL.
AND AS WE LOOK TO A FUTURE WITH
MORE TRANSIT, YOU KNOW, IS THIS
PART OF HOW WE DO IT WITH
WORKERS AT THE TABLE I THINK IS
REALLY CRITICAL, AND, AND I
THINK ALSO SO I WANT TO SORT OF
POINT THAT TO YOU, BUT ALSO FOR
SEIU WORKERS, YOU KNOW, I HAVE
RAISED CONCERNS PREVIOUSLY ABOUT
THE EO MYSELF, BECAUSE I THINK
THAT I'VE BEEN CONCERNED ABOUT
THE PRIVACY IMPLICATIONS OF
BRINGING, PRIVATE COMPANIES INTO
A SANDBOX WITH CONSUMER
CALIFORNIA CONSUMERS DATA, DATA.
THEY TRUST US AS GOVERNMENT TO
HOLD IN A DIFFERENT WAY THAN
THEY TRUST PRIVATE GOVERNMENT TO
HOLD AND UTILIZE AND TO ENSURE
THAT AS WE ENGAGE IN THESE
PRACTICES, WE'RE PROTECTING
CALIFORNIA'S CONSUMERS THE WAY
YOUR WORKERS DO EVERY DAY. AND,
IN IN A WAY, I'M NOT SURE THAT I
TRUST THE AMAZONS THAT WANT ME
TO GIVE AWAY MY CHILDREN'S
HEALTHCARE DATA TO DO, SO, YOU
KNOW, BOTH OF YOU, I THINK,
ENGAGE IN PRACTICES WHERE AI IS
COMING INTO PLAY. AND HOW DO
YOU, YOU KNOW, THINK WE THINK
ABOUT THAT IN ENGAGING AS A
GOVERNMENT TO PROTECT CONSUMERS
AND WORKERS. QUICKLY, I'LL SAY
YOU RAISE A POINT ABOUT THAT. I
THINK GOES TO A LITTLE BIT OF
THE DE-SKILLING CONVERSATION
THAT HAS HAPPENED TODAY, WHERE
OUR MEMBERS WHO OPERATE BUSSES
EARN A DECENT LIVING, IN LARGE
PART BECAUSE THEY HAVE
COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE.
THEY HAVE TO PASS MEDICAL EXAMS,
AND THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT TO DRUG
AND ALCOHOL TESTING. SO ALL OF
THAT SORT OF COMBINES INTO THEM
BEING HIGHLY SKILLED OPERATORS
WHO ARE VERY PROUD OF WHAT THEY
DO. YOU KNOW, LITERALLY DRIVING
THE VEHICLE DOWN THE ROAD AND,
AND A CONCERN WE HAVE IS IF YOU
TAKE IF YOU TAKE THAT AWAY FROM
THEM AND YOU'RE LEFT JUST BEING
A SUPERVISOR OF THE PUBLIC,
RIGHT. THAT'S NOT THAT DOESN'T
HAVE THE SAME SKILL LEVEL AS
BEING A BUS OPERATOR DOES TODAY.
AND I THINK EVERYONE HERE KNOWS
THAT AS SOON AS YOU KNOW, LABOR
CAN'T COMMAND THAT INCOME
MANAGEMENT IS NOT GOING TO GIVE
IT TO YOU. SO I THINK THAT GOES
TO THE, YOU KNOW, THE
DE-SKILLING, THE DISPLACEMENT OF
WORK. AND I THINK THAT'S
SOMETHING WE'RE VERY CONCERNED
ABOUT. CAN I ASK A FOLLOW UP
QUESTION? SO IS THE CONCERN I
THINK I'M HEARING YOU RIGHT. SO
I WANTED TO CLARIFY THE CONCERN
IS BECAUSE I, YOU KNOW, THERE'S
BEEN A LOT OF CONVERSATION OF
VERY DIFFERENT CONTEXT. NOT I
WITH THE BUILDING TRADES AROUND
SOME OF OUR ENVIRONMENTAL WORK.
THAT IS HAVING A SIMILAR IMPACT
ON I MEAN, I REPRESENT AN AREA
NEXT TO THE REFINERIES. SO AS
THOSE JOBS HAVE BEEN IMPACTED BY
OUR ENVIRONMENTAL MOVES, IT
ISN'T FOR THOSE WORKERS THAT
I'VE SPOKEN DIRECTLY TO AS MUCH
ABOUT, IT IS ABOUT WAGES,
BENEFITS AND ALL THE THINGS THAT
COME WITH BEING A UNION WORKER.
BUT IT'S ALSO ABOUT THE WORK.
RIGHT? SO WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY
WAS THEIR CONCERN IS THE WAGES,
BENEFITS, ALL THE THINGS YOU CAN
COMMAND. IS IT ALSO THE WORK? I
JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT
BECAUSE THAT'S NOT WHAT I HEARD.
YOU SAY, YEAH. I DON'T I DON'T
WANT TO, DOWNPLAY THE PERSONAL
CONNECTION. SO WE HEARD STORIES
BEFORE FROM THE BROTHER FROM
UFCW TALKING ABOUT THE
CONNECTION BETWEEN, YOU KNOW,
CUSTOMERS AND THE CASHIERS.
RIGHT. OUR BUS OPERATORS HAVE
THE SAME RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE
PEOPLE THAT THEY DRIVE. I GUESS
MY BEST DRIVER IN SAN FRANCISCO.
YEAH. SO, YOU KNOW, THEY THEY DO
HAVE THEY DO HAVE A PERSONAL
CONNECTION WITH THE PEOPLE THAT
THEY DRIVE. THEY'RE PART THEY'RE
PART OF THEIR COMMUNITIES. AND,
YOU KNOW, AND THAT'S EXTREMELY
IMPORTANT AS WELL. SO I DON'T
MEAN TO DOWNPLAY THAT AT ALL. I
MEAN, I THINK YOU KNOW, TO I
GUESS TO CLOSE WITH HOW WE
STARTED THINKING ABOUT THE
DYSTOPIAN OPTION, RIGHT? WE'RE
TALKING ABOUT A SOCIETY WHERE
PEOPLE RIDE IN VEHICLES THAT
DON'T HAVE A DRIVER OR OTHER
HUMANS IN THEM. THEY GO TO THE
STORE AND DON'T INTERACT WITH A
CASHIER. THEY SPEND THEIR TIME
ONLINE ON FACEBOOK, INTERACTING
WITH THINGS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT
BE ACTUAL HUMANS BOTS. SO YOU
KNOW IT ADDS UP TO SOMETHING
THAT IS NOT A SOCIETY I WOULD
WANT TO BE LIVING WITH. YOU
KNOW, IN AND I THINK THAT'S THE
HUMAN CONNECTION IS CERTAINLY
IMPORTANT. YEAH. THANK YOU. I
HAVE A THOUGHT ABOUT WHAT YOU
SAID ABOUT OUR, OUR BUSINESS.
IT'S, SO WE HAVE OUR WAGES AND
WORKING CONDITIONS PROCESS WHERE
ANY MEMBER CAN COME IN LEADING
UP TO A NEGOTIATION AND THEIR
CONCERNS INFORM THE PLENARY AND
OUR PROPOSALS THAT WE PUSH
ACROSS THE TABLE. WHEN THIS
TECHNOLOGY CAME IN, YOU KNOW, 25
YEARS AGO OR MORE, IT WAS SO
EXCITING. IT WAS SO EXCITING. IT
WAS A NEW FRONTIER. IT WAS WHAT
ARE HOW ARE PERFORMERS GOING TO
GIVE A DELIVER A PERFORMANCE
WITH THE DOTS ALL OVER THEIR
HEAD, OR WHAT'S IT GOING TO BE
LIKE TO ANIMATE A CREATURE
PERFORMANCE? THE WHAT WE'RE IN
NOW. AND IT'S HARD FOR A LOT OF
PEOPLE KIND OF IN THE PUBLIC TO
UNDERSTAND. AND IT BECOMES A
POLITICAL FOOTBALL. IS THE IDEA
OF THE ENTERTAINMENT INDUSTRY AS
AN ACTUAL INDUSTRY. WE HAVE
ACTUAL WORKERS, WORKERS WHO
WORK. IT'S A IT'S LIKE A FACTORY
JOB. AND WHEN YOU END UP IN A
SITUATION WHERE THE INDUSTRY IS
BEING, YOU KNOW, TIGHTENED,
THERE'S A NATURAL CONTRACTION
HAPPENING ANYWAY. BUT WHEN THE
ATTITUDES AND THE BEHAVIOR AND
THE HIRING AND THE DEMANDS THAT
ARE PLACED ON YOU END UP,
CREATING A KIND OF PUNISHING
EXPERIENCE FOR THOSE PERFORMERS,
YOU, YOU NEED THAT'S WHEN YOU
NEED GOOD, BARGAINING. AND IT'S
WHEN YOU NEED GOOD LEGISLATION
TO BACK THAT UP. YEAH, YEAH. AND
I'LL SAY IT'S INTERESTING IN MY
WORK ON, YOU KNOW, NAME,
LIKENESS AND IMAGE, ONE OF THE
THINGS I'VE SEEN IS THE
DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE STUDIOS,
THE MOVIE STUDIOS AND THE
RECORDING ARTISTS ASSOCIATION
AND HOW THEY REALLY THE
RELATIONSHIP WITH THE RECORDING
ARTISTS WITH THEIR INDUSTRY IS
VERY DIFFERENT. YEAH, RIGHT. AND
THERE'S SORT OF MUTUAL BENEFIT
AND PROTECTING THE, THE
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY OF THEIR
ARTISTS IN A WAY THAT I THINK
HAS BEEN REALLY FUN TO WATCH, TO
BE HONEST, BECAUSE THEY'VE
ALIGNED THE INTERESTS SUCH THAT
THEY BELIEVE PROTECTING THE
ARTISTS IS IN THEIR BENEFIT. AND
I TO YOUR POINT EARLIER ABOUT,
YOU KNOW, WE KNOW THAT WHEN
BUSINESS PUTS WORKERS FIRST, IT
HELPS THE BOTTOM LINE. AND I
WISH ALL INDUSTRIES WOULD GET
THERE. I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE, A
GUY WHO'S HERE, ERIC PESSOA, WHO
IS OUR MEMBER. HE'S ACTUALLY THE
CO-CHAIR OF THE LOS ANGELES NEW
TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE AND THE
KINDS OF WORK THEY'RE DOING IN
THEIR COMMITTEE IS JUST, MIND
EXPANDING, AND SO WHEN YOU TALK
ABOUT, LIKE, HOW TECHNOLOGIES
ARE BEING WOVEN AND USED AND
SHAPED AND WHERE WE CAN BOUNCE
FROM EACH OTHER, IT'S, IT'S A
IT'S AN EXCITING CHALLENGE. WE
DON'T HATE TECH. JUST WANT TO
PROTECT OUR WORKERS. YEAH. AND
THAT I WILL PASS IT OVER TO
ASSEMBLY MEMBER ERWIN. THANK YOU
VERY MUCH. AND I THINK THIS MORE
FOR MY CONSTITUENTS. YES
CALABASAS. NOT YOUR CONSTITUENT,
BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING,
WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
TRANSPORTATION OR, STATE
WORKERS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT
WITHIN STATE BOUNDARIES. SO
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WORKERS
THAT ARE IN CALIFORNIA,
OBVIOUSLY, IN THE IF YOU'RE
TALKING ABOUT THE MOVIE INDUSTRY
OR THE RECORDING INDUSTRY THAT'S
GOING ON THROUGHOUT THE UNITED
STATES, I'M DOING A BILL RIGHT
NOW ON, TRANSPORTATION.
TRANSPARENCY AND TRAINING DATA.
SO TRYING TO REALLY HAVE THESE
COMPANIES, TALK ABOUT WHO THEY
TRAINED ON AND HOPEFULLY, YOU
KNOW, GETTING EVENTUALLY THAT
WILL THAT'S SO IMPORTANT. I'M SO
GLAD YOU'RE DOING THAT. WELL,
WILL WE WILL SEE WHERE IT GOES.
BUT THIS IS AN THIS WOULD BE A
BILL THAT ONLY, AFFECTS CAL WORK
IN CALIFORNIA. SO THE QUESTION
IS FOR WORK THAT SPANS ACROSS
THE US. HOW DO YOU SEE THAT, HOW
DO YOU SEE THAT PLAYING OUT?
THERE ARE A LOT OF STATES THAT
ARE NOT NECESSARILY AS
SYMPATHETIC TO, UNION WORKERS.
THEY'RE LOOKING AT JUST, THE
BOTTOM LINE. AND IT WAS A GREAT
QUESTION. THERE IS A LOT OF
DISCUSSION ABOUT WE NEED THE
FEDS TO DO SOMETHING, BUT ALL OF
US KNOW QUITE CLEARLY THAT
ISSUES LIKE PRIVACY, THE FIRST
BILL IN CALIFORNIA PASSED IN
2018, AND CONGRESS STILL HAS NOT
MOVED ON. THAT ISSUE. SO, HOW
HOW WOULD YOU HOW WOULD YOU
ANSWER THAT? HOW DO WE GET OTHER
STATES TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY
ARE PLAYING BY THE SAME RULES?
BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY WE ARE GOING
TO BE PUTTING THE RIGHT TYPE OF
GUARDRAILS AND TRANSPARENCY ON
CALIFORNIA WILL BE DOING IT
FIRST. BUT THAT'S NOT GOING TO
BE THE CASE IN OTHER STATES. AND
WE DON'T WANT, FOR INSTANCE,
MOVIES TO MOVE. YOU KNOW, THESE
COMPANIES TO MOVE TO GEORGIA.
WELL, I STUDIED A LITTLE BIT
ABOUT THE RIGHT OF PUBLICITY AS
A AREA OF, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY
LAW AND, AND THERE THERE'S ALL
OF THESE. I PICTURE IT LIKE A,
LIKE A BATTLEFIELD, AND YOU'RE
GOING TO MOVE THIS PIECE INTO
PLAY AND YOU'RE GOING TO MOVE
THAT PIECE INTO PLAY. WE ARE A
NATIONAL UNION. WE HAVE
PERFORMERS IN NEW YORK, WE HAVE
PERFORMERS IN ATLANTA AND DALLAS
AND FLORIDA. I MEAN, WE WE'RE A
NATIONAL UNION. SO, THE COOL
THING IS THAT OUR, OUR CONTRACT
TRAVELS WITH US. BUT IN TERMS OF
LEGISLATION, IT'S CALIFORNIA.
YOU I MEAN, WE'RE WORKING
FEDERALLY. WE'RE YOU KNOW, WE
WILL FIND A WAY. I MEAN, WE HAVE
BANDWIDTH ISSUES, YOU KNOW, HOW
CAN WE WORK WITH, YOU KNOW,
WE'LL PICK THE STATES. INDIANA
HAS A GREAT, PIECE OF
LEGISLATION OR A LAW, A GREAT
LAW THAT DEALS WITH THIS,
PUBLICITY. RIGHT. SO, YOU KNOW,
MAYBE WE'LL OUR UNION WILL
FIGURE OUT HOW TO DOVETAIL WITH
THEM, BUT WHEN IT GETS RIGHT
DOWN TO IT, YOU KNOW, THIS IS
THIS, THIS ROOM, THE YOU PEOPLE
THAT YOU'RE THE ONES WHO ARE
GOING TO, LIKE, LEAD THE WAY ON
THIS, THAT. SO THANK YOU AHEAD
OF TIME AND WE AND YOU KNOW WE
WILL BE MAKING SURE THAT WE HELP
FACILITATE THE CONVERSATIONS
WITH THE FEDERAL, LEGISLATORS
AND WHOEVER THE HELL ELSE WE
NEED TO INCLUDE IN THE
CONVERSATION. YOU KNOW, WE WILL
WE WILL, THE MOST IMPORTANT
THING FOR ME, FOR THIS MOMENT IS
THAT THERE IS AND IT'S CLEAR
THAT THERE ALREADY IS. ACTUALLY,
I WAS IN A DARRELL ISSA HAD A
HEARING THIS SIMILAR TYPE OF
HEARING, IN, IN LA, AND HE HAD
ADAM SCHIFF AND, MATT GAETZ IN
THERE AND EVERYBODY IN BETWEEN.
AND THEY WERE JUMPING UP TO
AGREE WITH EACH OTHER ON THIS
ISSUE. AND SO THEN WE DID I DID
A ROUNDTABLE AND IT HAD ALL THE,
THE, WHAT DO YOU CALL THEM? THE,
GENERAL COUNSELS OF A BUNCH OF
THE STUDIOS. AND THEY WERE
LISTENING VERY CLOSELY BECAUSE
THEY'RE READY TO JUMP UP AND
PROTECT THEIR FIRST AMENDMENT
RIGHTS, BUT THEY ALSO KNOW THAT
THEIR ENTIRE LIBRARIES ARE IN
JEOPARDY. SO THEY WANT TO MAKE
SURE THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WE
THEY'RE MORE THAN HAPPY TO, YOU
KNOW, USE US AS A, AS A BLOCKER
AND KIND OF RUN BEHIND AND
ACHIEVE SOME OF THIS STUFF FOR
THEM. SO IT'S A IT'S A GREAT
ENVIRONMENT, I WOULD THINK, TO
BE LEGISLATING IN BECAUSE ASIDE
FROM THE ALL IMPORTANT TECH
INDUSTRY THAT SUPPORTS THIS
ENTIRE CITY, YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF
SUPPORT ACROSS THE STATE, AROUND
THE COUNTRY. THIS IS MY LAST, MY
LAST TERM. SO, YEAH. YOU HAVE
YOU CLEARLY HAVE SOME FANS HERE,
YOU KNOW, BEFORE I GO TO PUBLIC
COMMENT, I JUST, YOU KNOW, THIS
WHOLE HEARING HAS BEEN SO
INTERESTING AND EYE OPENING,
ESPECIALLY AFTER SITTING AND
HEARING, AFTER HEARING AND
HEARING FROM THE COMPANIES THAT
ARE CREATING THE TECHNOLOGY AND
TELLING US OVER AND OVER, IN
SOME CASES THAT THEY DON'T HAVE
THE MONEY, TO IMPLEMENT SOME OF
THE IDEAS THAT WE COME UP WITH
OR THAT OR THE REGULATIONS THAT
WE'RE PROPOSING. AND SO THEY'RE
OFTEN OPPOSING MANY OF THE
THINGS THAT WE'RE BRINGING TO
THE TABLE. BUT NONE OF THAT HAS
STOPPED US. AND INCLUDING, THE
REASON I HAD THIS HEARING TODAY
IN THE FIRST PLACE WAS TO MAKE
SURE THAT WE ARE MAKING THAT
WORKERS ARE AT THE FOREFRONT,
NOT THE AFTER THE FACT,
TECHNOLOGY SHOULD BE WORKING FOR
ALL OF US, NOT, JUST THE
WEALTHY. AND IT IS UP TO US AS
LEGISLATORS, LEGISLATORS, TO
CONTINUE TALKING ABOUT
REGULATION AND SAFEGUARDS,
REGARDLESS OF THE OPPOSITION,
BECAUSE, AS WAS MENTIONED
EARLIER, WE'VE SEEN WHAT
INACTION DOES WHEN IT COMES TO
TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIAL MEDIA AND
OTHER THINGS, AND THEY HAVEN'T
BEEN TO THE BENEFIT OF CONSUMERS
OR WORKERS. AND NOW WE'RE AT A
PIVOTAL MOMENT WHERE WE DO HAVE
A LOT OF THE RESEARCH, A LOT OF
THE EXPERTS WHO ARE, YOU KNOW,
GIVING US IDEAS AND PROPOSALS AS
TO FIGURE OUT THAT BALANCE WHERE
WE CAN HAVE TECHNOLOGY WE LOVE
TO. I CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT MY CELL
PHONE, WE LOVE TECHNOLOGY, BUT
WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE
THAT BALANCE. AND IT'S UP TO US.
AND ONE OTHER POINT I WANT TO
MAKE IS THAT, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF
CONVERSATIONS ABOUT COLLECTIVE
BARGAINING AGREEMENTS AND
LANGUAGE IN THOSE ARE GREAT, AND
WE SHOULD HAVE THAT. BUT WE ALSO
HAVE MILLIONS OF WORKERS ACROSS
THE COUNTRY TO DO NOT HAVE A
LABOR UNION, DO NOT HAVE
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
AGREEMENTS, AND THEREFORE RELY
ON US TO COME UP WITH THOSE
SAFEGUARDS, SO ON THAT NOTE, I
WANT TO, OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC
COMMENT, ONE MINUTE EACH. AND,
AND THEN WE'LL CLOSE THIS
HEARING. THANK YOU. GOOD
AFTERNOON. YVONNE FERNANDEZ WITH
THE CALIFORNIA FEDERATION OF
LABOR UNIONS. I'M HERE TODAY TO
SPEAK ON BEHALF OF JILLIAN
ARNOLD, WHO IS THE CHAIR OF THE
AYATSI ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
AND TECHNOLOGY BASIC AGREEMENT
BARGAINING SUBCOMMITTEE, AND
ALSO WHO IS THE PRESIDENT OF
AYATSI LOCAL 695 REPRESENTING
CALIFORNIA. THE CALIFORNIA ARTS
COUNCIL, FOR REFERENCE, THE
CALIFORNIA AYATSI COUNCIL
REPRESENTS REPRESENTS OVER
55,000 WOMEN AND MEN ACROSS THE
STATE WHO WORK IN FILM,
TELEVISION, AND LIVE EVENTS. I
WAS A TOP PRIORITY OF 2020 FOR
BASIC AGREEMENT WITH THE AMPTP,
AND WHICH IS WHY THE AGREEMENT
INCLUDED SUBSTANTIAL AI
LANGUAGE. AYATSI CONTRACT NOW
STIPULATES THAT WHEN AN EMPLOYER
ASSIGNS THE USE OF AI SYSTEMS TO
AN EMPLOYEE, THAT WORK IS
CONSIDERED COVERED BY THE
AGREEMENT. MOREOVER, NO EMPLOYEE
IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE AI
PROMPTS IN ANY MANNER THAT WOULD
RESULT IN THE DISPLACEMENT OF
ANY COVERED EMPLOYEE PER THE
AGREEMENT. ANY REQUEST TO SCAN
AN EMPLOYEE MUST BE CLEARED
THROUGH A SEPARATELY SIGNED
STATEMENT OR WRITING, AND IN A
FIRST AYATSI CONTRACT STIPULATES
THAT CONSENT TO SCANNING CANNOT
BE A CONDITION OF EMPLOYMENT
WITH SOME LIMITED EXCEPTIONS,
THE EMPLOYER WILL BE REQUIRED TO
NEGOTIATE WITH AYATSI OVER, OVER
ANY IMPACT OF THE USE OF THE AI
SYSTEMS MAY HAVE ON THEIR
MEMBERS. THANK YOU TO THE CHAIRS
AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE.
AYATSI LOOKS FORWARD TO WORKING
WITH YOU ALL TO PROTECT WORKING
MEN AND WOMEN IN CALIFORNIA.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM
CHAIR. MEMBERS AND STAFF MITCH
STEIGER WITH CFT, A UNION OF
EDUCATORS AND CLASSIFIED
PROFESSIONALS. I APPRECIATE THE
OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY TO
THIS ISSUE AND THIS TECHNOLOGY
THAT HAS NOW KIND OF, COME OUT
OF NOWHERE AND IS NOW EVERYWHERE
IN THE EDUCATION WORLD. IT'S
REACHED A POINT WHERE IT CAN BE
USED TO ANALYZE TEXT, DEVELOP A
CURRICULUM, DEVELOP A SLIDE DECK
AND ESSAY ASSIGNMENTS THAT CAN
THEN BE ASSIGNED TO STUDENTS WHO
CAN THEN USE GENERATIVE AI TO
WRITE THEIR ESSAYS. THEY CAN
THEN HAND THAT BACK IN IN THE
ORIGINAL AI CAN THEN THOROUGHLY
GRADE THOSE ESSAYS. SO WE NOW
HAVE TECHNOLOGY WHERE IT'S
BASICALLY JUST TWO FORMS OF AI
COMMUNICATING WITH ONE ANOTHER.
IN THE EDUCATION SYSTEM. THAT'S
NOT USUALLY HOW IT'S BEING USED,
BUT THERE ARE PIECES OF IT THAT
ARE BEING USED THAT WAY. THERE
ARE STUDENTS USING GENERATIVE AI
TO WRITE THEIR COLLEGE ESSAYS. A
PRETTY SIGNIFICANT PERCENTAGE OF
THEM ARE DOING THAT, AND IT'S
EASY TO IMAGINE A WORLD WHERE
ALL OF THIS TECHNOLOGY EXISTS
AND COEXISTS WELL WITH TEACHERS
AND STUDENTS, AND IT'S BEING
USED IN A SMART WAY WITH STRICT
LIMITS WHERE IT MAKES SENSE,
WHERE WORKERS ARE INVOLVED AND
WHERE IT PROTECTS BOTH
COMMUNITIES. WE DON'T LIVE IN
THAT WORLD RIGHT NOW. WE'RE
TAKING THE STEPS TOWARDS GETTING
THERE, AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO
BEING INVOLVED IN THE DISCUSSION
TO MAKE SURE THAT THOSE
REGULATIONS THAT WILL GET US
THERE, TAKE PLACE. THANK YOU.
GOOD AFTERNOON, MADAM CHAIR. AND
STAFF, JANICE O'MALLEY WITH
AFSCME. I JUST REALLY APPRECIATE
THE COMMITTEE HAVING THIS
HEARING, AND I THINK YOU CAN
TELL BY JUST THE BREADTH OF THE
DIFFERENT, WORKERS WITHIN
DIFFERENT SECTORS, HOW
TECHNOLOGY IN AI IS REALLY
AFFECTING THE WORKPLACE. AND TO
YOUR POINT ABOUT WORKERS NEEDING
TO BE, WITHIN THE FOREFRONT OF
THIS EMERGING TECHNOLOGY? YOU
KNOW, WE ALSO HAVE TO BE AT THE
TABLE. WE'VE SEEN TECHNOLOGY
BEING USED TO CREATE
EFFICIENCIES, IN THE WORKPLACE
AT THE TUNE OF MILLIONS OF
DOLLARS. AND IF THAT TECHNOLOGY
FAILS OR DOESN'T, DOESN'T END UP
WORKING FOR THEM, THAT MEANS
THAT THE THAT THEIR EMPLOYER HAS
SHELLED OUT A LOT OF MONEY, THAT
COULD HAVE BEEN USED TOWARDS,
WAGES AND BENEFITS AND OTHER
REALLY IMPORTANT THINGS, THAT
HAVEN'T BEEN THAT ARE AT A LOSS
NOW, AND SO THANK YOU SO MUCH
FOR HAVING THIS HEARING. I LOOK
FORWARD TO HAVING ONGOING
CONVERSATIONS ON THIS. HI. MY
NAME IS ERIC BUSOGA. I AM A
PROFESSIONAL ACTOR AND 25 YEAR
MEMBER OF SAG-AFTRA FROM LOS
ANGELES. IN 2014, ACTIVISION
HIRED ME TO DO PERFORMANCE
CAPTURE AS A BELGIAN GENETICIST
NAMED DOC. IN THE BLOCKBUSTER
VIDEO GAME CALL OF DUTY ADVANCED
WARFARE. AFTER THE GAME CAME
OUT, A FRIEND CALLED AND SAID,
ERIC, MY SON JUST SHOT YOU.
TURNS OUT ACTIVISION HAD ALSO
PUT MY FACE ON A DIFFERENT
CHARACTER THAT YOU CAN PLAY FOR
A MONTHLY FEE TO FIGHT OTHER
PLAYERS. IF YOUR KIDS PLAYED
THIS GAME, MY LIKENESS WAS
SHOOTING AT YOUR CHILDREN AND
THEY WOULD SHOOT ME, BLOW ME OFF
A CLIFF WITHOUT MY INFORMED
CONSENT OR EVEN ADDITIONAL
COMPENSATION, AND THAT YOUR CALL
OF DUTY GROSS MORE THAN TAYLOR
SWIFT'S ALBUM. 1989 DISNEY'S
FROZEN AND GUARDIANS OF THE
GALAXY COMBINED, ALL I RECEIVED
WAS MY ORIGINAL SESSION FEE. AND
TEN YEARS LATER, AT THE DAWN OF
AI, THE GAMING COMPANIES REFUSED
TO CHANGE, AND SO OUR UNION WAS
FORCED TO STRIKE. WE PERFORMERS
ARE UNIQUELY POSITIONED BECAUSE
OUR DIGITAL IDENTITY IS OUR ONLY
BUSINESS. YOU TAKE AWAY A
CARPENTER'S VOICE. THEY CAN
STILL BUILD, BUT YOU TAKE AWAY A
VOICEOVERS VOICE. THEY WILL
NEVER WORK AGAIN. AND THE
SOLUTION IS INFORMED CONSENT AND
DIGITAL PROVENANCE. AS SEAN
ASTIN HAS SAID, PRO-LABOR AI
LEGISLATION IS CRUCIAL AND IT
MUST BE ENFORCED, AND WE NEED
YOUR HELP TO PROTECT LABOR
RIGHTS AND SAFEGUARD THE PUBLIC
FROM DEEP FAKES. THANK YOU.
FANTASTIC MADAM CHAIR, AND I
DON'T KNOW IF YOU'RE ALL THE
CHAIRS OR THE COMMITTEE FOLKS
ARE, AND THE STAFF AND EVERYONE
HERE IN THE ROOM. THANK YOU SO
MUCH FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO
SPEAK. MY NAME IS SUSIE DUFF,
AND I AM ABOUT TO BE A ONE HALF
OF A CENTURY MEMBER. VERY PROUD
MEMBER OF THE SCREEN ACTORS
GUILD, AND EVERY YEAR HAVE
EARNED MY LIVING, IN THAT
CAPACITY AND I, I'M HERE TO
OFFER YOU A RESEARCH RESOURCE. I
HAVE A TREMENDOUS GIFT TO YOU,
IN THE NAME OF A FILM COMPOSER,
RICHARD GIBBS. I WAS ON THE
PHONE WITH HIM. HE HE LIVES IN
MY COMMUNITY OF MALIBU,
CALIFORNIA. AS I WAS IN ROUTE
HERE LAST NIGHT. RICHARD IS ALSO
A GOVERNOR, AT THE ACADEMY OF
MOTION PICTURE ARTS AND SCIENCES.
SO HE WALKS BOTH WORLDS. AND FOR
ABOUT A DECADE, HE HAS RUN A
WEEKLY SESSION CALLED THE
COMPOSERS BREAKFAST CLUB. THEY
ARE DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE IN
AND OUT, UP AND DOWN. AND HE WAS
EXPLAINING TO ME HIS IDEAS LAST
NIGHT ON THE PHONE, AND I FELT
LIKE A LITTLE GIRL IN HER MOM'S
HIGH HEELS. I JUST WANTED TO GO
GET SOMETHING TO EAT, AND I SAID
TO HIM, CAN, IF I GET A CHANCE,
CAN I RECOMMEND YOU TO THIS
COMMITTEE? AND HE SAID, GO
AHEAD. HIS NAME IS RICHARD
GIBBS, AND IF YOU'D LIKE HIS
INFORMATION, I'LL BE HAPPY TO
GET IT TO YOU. HE WOULD BE A
TREMENDOUS RESOURCE AND BLESS
YOU AND THANK YOU FOR ALL THE
GREAT WORK YOU'RE DOING. AND
THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, FOR BEING
HERE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU. YES.
OKAY SEEING NO OTHER PUBLIC
COMMENTS, I WANT TO ONCE AGAIN
THANK ALL OF OUR PANELISTS,
ESPECIALLY THE WORKERS WHO
TRAVELED HERE VERY, YOU KNOW,
FROM A LONG WAYS, TO MAKE IT TO
THE TODAY'S HEARING AND MAKE
SURE THAT YOUR VOICES ARE HEARD
AND PART OF THE CONVERSATION,
MUCHAS GRACIAS A LOS
TRABAJADORES QUÊ VINIERON HOY SE
QUÊ SE LEVANTA UN TEMPRANO PARA
PODER VENIR A DAR SU VOZ A LA
TECNOLOGIA. THANKS AGAIN. WITH
THAT, WE ARE NOW ADJOURNED.