Employers in Australia face “AI washing” scrutiny as job cuts head offshore

Qantas’ decision to cut 850 jobs has drawn attention to how some of Australia’s largest employers explain their workforce reductions. Unions and academics are questioning whether AI is really the reason the roles are disappearing.

On 10 November, the national carrier announced that it would cut jobs and move some corporate functions offshore as part of an AI-driven overhaul with consulting firm Accenture. The move has led to accusations of “AI washing”, where an organisation blames layoffs on AI when the main driver may be wider cost-cutting, such as shifting work overseas.

Qantas is not the only one. WiseTech and Atlassian have cut jobs this year and pointed to AI. Telstra has reduced roles through its own AI joint venture with Accenture and sent some of that work to India. Other organisations have shrunk their local headcounts while expanding in India, the Philippines and Vietnam, without mentioning AI at all.

Unions argue that lower-paid offshore employees, not the technology, are replacing employees in Australia. Melissa Donnelly, Secretary of the Australian Council of Trade Unions, said unions were concerned about “the risk of organisations using AI simply as a cover to cut Australian jobs with no accountability.”

“From Qantas, to the big banks, employees deserve transparency and genuine consultation over decisions that impact their jobs and lives,” she said, reported Reuters.

The Australian Services Union represents the affected Qantas employees. It accused the airline of “using AI to launder their cuts to Australian jobs”. On 11 November, Greens Senator Barbara Pocock said that while AI was transforming workplaces, that was “no excuse to let it run rampant”.

In a statement, Qantas said it would continue consulting with unions and was focused on “redeployment opportunities” and support for affected employees. The statement did not address concerns about AI washing.

Uri Gal, a professor at the University of Sydney Business School, said organisations had “real incentives” to frame cuts this way. “An organisation that announces job cuts to reduce costs may face criticism, whereas one that presents the same decision as part of an AI transformation can appear innovative and forward-looking,” he said.

READ MORE: Australia’s AI job impact still hard to find, Treasury report finds

In his view, the Qantas decision looked like conventional outsourcing. He said it showed how AI can help justify a restructuring before the technology’s productivity gains have materialised. “If AI is making these jobs redundant, why does the work first need to be transferred to another group of employees?” he asked.

The debate comes as the labour market cools, with unemployment at a five-year high of 4.7%. This week, the Reserve Bank of Australia said AI had not yet caused widespread job losses. However, it noted “tentative signs of adjustment”, with job ads weakening in occupations exposed to AI.

The government said it expected employees in Australia to share in the benefits of new technologies, and that employers should invest in upskilling them to use AI.