PHAKAMILE HLUBI-MAJOLA

South Africa faces a dilemma. The same technologies promising productivity gains and smarter services are quietly rewriting the rules of work.

By 2030, AI will not be a distant policy debate; it will be a force that displaces, reshapes and concentrates economic power. Some may call this alarmist, but academics and industry experts warn of a looming jobs crisis of unprecedented scale. The fundamental question is: are unions ready to respond?

The World Economic Forum’s "Future of Jobs Report 2025" highlights AI, digital access and the green transition as the most transformative forces reshaping work. By 2030 tasks will be split almost evenly between humans and machines. The report projects that 92-million roles will be replaced by AI, while 170-million new jobs will be created globally — a net gain of 78-million. Yet this optimistic balance is unlikely in South Africa.

Our triple crisis of inequality, poverty and unemployment, compounded by the entrenched digital divide, means AI is more likely to deepen exclusion unless deliberate interventions are made. New jobs will emerge, but mostly in skilled sectors, leaving most workers behind.

Most South African workers are unskilled or semiskilled, concentrated in administrative, clerical, retail, and frontline service roles — the very categories most vulnerable to automation.

Unions have the leverage, history and moral authority to insist those choices protect workers and communities

Affordable internet access, digital literacy, and devices remain out of reach for millions. High data costs make connectivity a privilege, locking rural and low-income communities out of opportunity. With one of the world’s highest inequality levels, AI risks widening the gap by concentrating wealth among those with access to infrastructure and advanced skills.

The decommissioning of Komatipoort power station in Mpumalanga illustrates the danger of poorly managed transitions. Instead of creating green jobs, it led to mass job losses, community decline and small business closures. The community is worse off today, showing that policy promises of “new jobs” can fail if retraining, local economic support and community planning are not prioritised. AI adoption risks repeating this injustice if workers are excluded from decision-making.

Across South Africa, industries such as mining, finance, retail, health care and agriculture are steadily embedding AI into their operations. In mining, predictive maintenance and safety monitoring reduce the need for constant human oversight. Banks automate credit scoring and fraud detection. Retailers use AI for demand forecasting, hospitals pilot AI diagnostics and farmers adopt precision irrigation and drone monitoring. These efficiency gains often substitute for routine and semiskilled labour.

Business surveys show strong enthusiasm for AI adoption, with many firms reporting they are exploring or preparing for integration. Yet only a minority have formal strategies or measurable returns. This gap between enthusiasm and structured planning is dangerous: companies are experimenting at scale without transparent transition plans for workers whose jobs will be altered or erased. If automation accelerates without safeguards, livelihoods will be at risk.

History shows that when technology changes fast, the biggest losers are those with the least bargaining power. Once a role is automated and a workforce dispersed, jobs rarely return. Unions that wait for employers or the government to act will find themselves negotiating severance packages rather than shaping the future of work. Labour must drive how AI is introduced, using platforms such as Nedlac to negotiate benefits from productivity gains and protections for displaced workers. AI adoption must be treated as industrial policy and social justice, not merely corporate strategy.

Workers must not shy away from demanding reskilling, income support and democratic oversight

Deputy President Paul Mashatile’s proposal for a digital workers charter offers a critical opportunity for unions to drive the process and design policy to protect workers. Such a charter should enshrine:

Mandatory worker consultation with veto power over unilateral automation;
Binding sectoral transition plans, requiring industries to publish AI impact audits and phased automation timelines;
Reskilling and income support funds, financed through an automation levy on large adopters and public coinvestment;
Targeted investment for rural areas, ensuring AI does not entrench inequality; and
Redistribution of productivity gains through profit-sharing or community benefit agreements where automation yields significant savings.

These measures would preserve dignity, maintain social cohesion and ensure technology serves society rather than displacing it.

If labour fails to act, the consequences will be calamitous. Expect mass displacement, hollowed towns where mines and factories once sustained families, and a labour market rewarding capital while leaving the majority behind. Social unrest, political instability and deeper inequality will follow. Technology will not stop, but how it is deployed, and who benefits, are political choices. Unions have the leverage, history and moral authority to insist those choices protect workers and communities.

Workers must not shy away from demanding reskilling, income support and democratic oversight. The alternative is a future where workers are collateral damage in a race for efficiency. We can choose otherwise, but only if we act with urgency, clarity and collective force.