AI 'Augmentation' Myth Fails Vulnerable Workers in Québec, Study Finds
A survey of 4,595 union members reveals AI benefits are unevenly distributed, often increasing stress for those with fewer credentials.
The promise that artificial intelligence will universally liberate workers from tedious tasks is clashing with a harsher reality for the labor force in Québec. A 2025 survey of 4,595 union members suggests that instead of a tide that lifts all boats, AI is reinforcing existing professional divides and increasing anxiety for vulnerable employees.
Conducted by the International Observatory on the Social Impacts of AI and Digital Technology (Obvia) in collaboration with 11 labor unions, the study found that productivity gains are far from universal. Only 44% of daily AI users report a real gain in productivity. Conversely, 26% of those users report a loss of efficiency, attributing the decline to "AI slop"—the production of poor-quality generated work that requires manual correction.
While the impact on workload is mixed—with 46% of respondents reporting a lighter burden and 17% reporting an increased one—the benefits are starkly divided by education. According to the data, 55% of post-graduate degree holders feel more productive using AI, while only 22% of high school graduates report the same benefit.
A Gap in Governance
The study highlights a systemic failure in how organizations deploy these tools. Only 24% of respondents stated that their organization has a formal policy governing the use of AI. Even more concerning for labor advocates is the lack of transparency: only 12% of workers were consulted before AI was deployed in their workplace.
This lack of oversight contributes to a climate of insecurity. Approximately 18% of workers fear total job replacement, a sentiment most pronounced among those working in the services and manufacturing sectors, as well as those with fewer educational credentials.
The Inequality Engine
These findings suggest that AI is not a neutral tool for efficiency but a force that can exacerbate social and professional inequality. The "augmented work" narrative suggests a future of increased job satisfaction, yet the reality for many is a reinforcement of labor market fault lines. For highly educated professionals, AI acts as a multiplier; for technical and service workers, it often introduces new forms of surveillance and instability.
As one college professor surveyed in the study noted, the pace of change is overwhelming: "Tools are evolving so quickly that we don’t have time to keep up with the changes. This is anxiety-provoking and discouraging."
The Path Forward
If AI continues to be deployed without collective bargaining or transparent oversight, it risks undermining worker autonomy rather than enhancing it. The Québec study serves as a warning that without intentional policy interventions, the "augmentation" of work may only apply to the top tier of the workforce, leaving the rest to manage the "slop" and the stress of potential displacement.