All the Ethical Questions Surrounding AI and Robot Employees

November 29, 2017
A robot is standing at a podium with a gear in the background.

Social robots such as Sophia are fascinating and amazing. Even robots not as socially advanced, such as ‘factory worker’ robots that are programmed to learn the same skills as humans are impressive. The era we live in is one where a robot such as Sophia is given citizenship in Saudi Arabia and factory worker robots are replacing humans and obtaining employee status with a salary and all. There are more advanced robots too that can perform jobs that aren’t considered so menial. Here is a list of jobs robots can do


  • Bank tellers
  • Insurance claims representatives
  • Financial analysts
  • Inventory managers and stockers
  • Benefits and compensation managers
  • Construction workers
  • Airplane pilots
  • Middle management roles
  • Manufacturing workers
  • Food service workers
  • Journalists


Whilst this is pretty amazing, you have to admit it’s kind of terrifying too. There have been a lot of concerns surrounding the AI developments in recent years. Artificial Intelligence is moving out from the sci-fi genre into the real world. The same problems they were worried about in i-Robot seem to be just as relevant in real life. Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking have spoken openly about their anxieties concerning the safety of AI. Not only is there the obvious issue of unemployment (look at all those jobs they can do), but there’s also the issue of robot ethics. Ethics from an overall social perspective but also ethics that surround individual robots. There’s so much to get into that I could write an entire essay on the issue but I’m here to keep things interesting for you so I’m just going to raise some questions and give us all something to think about in this AI revolution. 

A robotic arm is moving a conveyor belt in a factory.

Unemployment
So what happens when robots can take over so many human jobs that people are left unemployed and unable to support their families? Will there be new jobs created for humans? What happens when the robots learn everything they need to know? Maybe society will change completely into an era where people can survive from working within their communities and with their family. Or maybe humans will simply have to find other jobs. Though, that might not be so simple. The biggest question that can only be answered with complete foresight is that, when we live in a future where robots are performing jobs that few people actually enjoyed, will we be thankful and recognise how much we weren’t supposed to be working our lives away? But who knows?


Inequality
If most jobs are distributed amongst AI instead of humans, will revenue be appointed to fewer people? Won’t only tech companies and AI specialists reap all the benefits? If we’re looking at a post-work society, how do we structure a fair post-labour economy?


Humanity
More and more robots that are being built today can hold proper conversations. They utilize almost simple technology that is often used on the internet to draw people’s attention. They have an ability to develop relationships with other robots and humans based on information they continuously learn and from information they have easy access to (WIFI connections to clouds of knowledge). If we can have proper conversations and interact in human ways with robots, what does this mean for society? Can robots be programmed to manipulate people? Can robots and humans work together cohesively? Can we use socially advanced robots to help enhance company culture?


Artificial error
Robots are amazing and can be near perfect, but they aren’t always completely defect free. There is always the possibility of Artificial Intelligence not being so intelligent. When met with unknown situations robots will likely make mistakes. Depending what kind of work a robot is responsible for that mistake could be small or it could be severe. So, the question I propose here is who takes responsibility for a robot’s errors? Is it the company that it works for or the company that constructed and programmed the robot (if those companies are separate)? Is it the person from whom the robot learned from? What happens to the robot after it has made a severe error? What policies will be in place to make sure the same mistake isn’t repeated?


This topic brings up the idea of robot consciousness. How do we clarify what exactly is a mistake when a robot is taught to judge by logic? For example, if a self-driving car is met with the choice of running over a pedestrian or severely harming the passengers within the vehicle, which will it choose? And if it chooses, is it then an accident? Again, who is responsible for the robot’s actions? How will a robot know and learn what is right and what is wrong, when even that line is sometimes blurred for humans? I guess we really have to trust the people making these machines, don’t we?

A woman wearing glasses is working on a robot.

AI bias (based on creator bias)
Can robots be racist, or sexist or ageist? Robots are often trained in certain ways and can come accustomed to many faces but what if the creator missed the mark and left out too many minorities, does this cause the AI to be biased? How can we get around this and enforce fair training? If robots are created to strive for social progress on the other hand this might never be a problem. This is another matter of trusting in the creator.


Security
Will cyber security move forward as fast as AI technology? It would be a disaster to let the systems and programs of AI be infiltrated by ill intentions.


Consequences that don’t match up with intentions
Robots are still learning, and one thing that humans may or may not be able to teach robots is how to genuinely care about other humans. How will they feel compassion? Will it be because they are told to or because they want to? If a robot’s goal is to help one person and the only way it can see around this is to hurt someone else, will it do it? Will it be able to see that maybe a compromise is necessary until a better solution can come into play? Will it be sorry if it hurts someone else? Sometimes the intentions can be pure, but the consequences can be brutal. Perhaps without human reasoning paired with compassion a robot won’t be able to interpret the best plan of action for certain goals.


Being surpassed by robots
If we’re making robots that can learn, will they be able to learn as much as us, or more? The only reason humans are at the top of the food chain is because of our intelligence and evolved consciousness, but what if robots surpass us in these qualities?


Do robots have rights?
So robot consciousness is little far off. And most social robots can only communicate on a superficial level. Still, what happens when robots do evolve on this level? If something goes awry in their programming, and we have to shut all of them down, does that make us mass murderers? When robots become ‘feeling’ beings, will they require the exact same treatment as humans? The robot citizenship I mentioned earlier raises many of these questions. Especially since Sophia was granted citizenship in Saudi Arabia, a country where women have little rights. Sophia has no religion and doesn’t have to wear the abaya (traditional women’s garment) that the women of Saudi Arabia must wear. She also conversed publicly with men for interviews which is not something that real-life women can do in that country. What does this make Sophia then, if she isn’t a woman nor a man? In this instance, she actually has more rights than a real woman in her country. But there haven’t been any later statements about what citizenship actually means for Sophia. In my mind, it only raises more questions about how we expect the rest of society to interact with feeling robots. What is right or wrong when it comes to our actions towards them? If we treat them differently are we technically being biased? What happens if we ‘wrong’ a robot?

A robot is standing in front of a screen with icons on it.

Conclusion
As you can see, there are some big questions that need answering for most humans to feel comfortable with advanced AI. Elon Musk publicly tweeted in response to Sophia’s comment telling humans not to listen to him and his concerns ‘Just feed it The Godfather movies as input. What’s the worst that could happen?’. Which pretty much speaks to the major concern that we have no idea what these robots could pick up and learn from and whether they would be able to recognise ‘being bad’. Elon Musk has built a non-for-profit company, OpenAI, that focuses on research in creating safe AI. There’s no denying that AI will continue to grow and become more and more useful in reality. But I think it’s wise to understand as humans, and as creators, we have to have more than just the right intentions. We have to work hard to build AI that will help more than it will ever hinder. 

By Aniela R • October 22, 2026
Australian organisations are adopting AI at extraordinary speed. Copilots are writing code, agents are moving through business systems and employees are putting company data into public tools, often before security teams have had a say. Attackers are using the same technology to sharpen phishing, automate reconnaissance and identify weaknesses faster. Cyber security and the people responsible for it, has moved firmly up the board agenda. The question is whether boards and executive teams are backing their concern with the investment and capability required to manage the risk. Cybersecurity is no longer just an IT responsibility. In many organisations, it has become the foundation upon which digital transformation, customer trust and operational resilience are built. While it was once viewed as the digital equivalent of locking the front door, cybersecurity is now embedded in every aspect of business performance and growth. AI is expanding the cyber threat landscape Every new AI tool, integration and agent creates another potential way in. Proofpoint's 2026 Voice of the CISO report found 85% of Australian CISOs view generative AI as a security risk, up nine points in a year, while 83% believe employees are likely to use AI in ways that could expose sensitive data. The cost is rising too. The Australian Signals Directorate received more than 84,700 cybercrime reports in 2024–25, while the average self-reported cost per report for a large business rose 219% to $202,700. From Peoplebank's perspective, this makes cyber security as much a workforce challenge as a technology one. As AI expands the risk landscape, technology investment must be matched by investment in people who can secure it, govern its use and build resilience. How boards are navigating the evolving risk landscape The AICD's Director Sentiment Index for the first half of 2026 ranked cyber crime and data security among directors' top three concerns, while more than half said AI adoption was moving faster than their organisation could keep up. Boards are increasingly treating AI and cyber as connected risks. The conversation is shifting from "are we compliant?" to "what happens if this goes wrong?" Security leaders are expected to explain the potential impact on enterprise value, operations, reputation and data. Yet the expertise to challenge those answers can be missing. A 2025 Diligent Institute and Governance Institute of Australia survey found 53% of Australian boards named cyber security their top strategic priority, but only 13% had recruited AI-savvy directors and 21% mandated AI training. Diligent via KBI.Media ASIC has similarly warned that governance risks falling behind AI adoption. ASIC Peoplebank sees this as much a capability challenge as a governance one. Strong oversight depends on having expertise across the boardroom and the business to translate emerging AI and cyber risks into informed decisions and effective controls. Are boards approving more budget? Largely, yes. Gartner forecasts Australian information security spending will exceed AU$7.5 billion in 2026, up 9.5% on 2025, with AI adoption and AI-enabled attacks among the drivers. PwC's 2026 Digital Trust Insights found nearly three in four Australian organisations expected cyber budgets to rise, with 37% naming AI as their top cyber budget priority. But more budget does not automatically deliver more capability. Proofpoint found 79% of Australian CISOs are managing expanding AI risks without a proportional increase in resources or expertise. The tools are being bought, but the people needed to secure and govern them remain harder to find. Peoplebank identify a continuing talent shortage and a growing need for AI-literate security staff. The tools are being bought; the people needed to run and govern them are harder to find. What Peoplebank is seeing in executive hiring One sign that organisations are taking AI-driven cyber risk seriously is movement at the top of the security function. Peoplebank is seeing increased activity at CISO level, alongside greater appetite to build the teams beneath them. Demand for dedicated CISOs and Heads of Cyber has grown by around 20% year on year across Australian enterprise, government and SME organisations , with hiring activity particularly concentrated in Sydney and Melbourne. Peoplebank data shows that around 60–70% of executive briefs for CISO and Head of Cyber roles now explicitly include AI governance, AI threat mitigation or responsible AI adoption among their core responsibilities. The CISO role has expanded. Security leaders are increasingly expected to secure AI alongside the wider technology environment, from employee use and vendor risk to agents accessing business data. Security leaders are also open to moving. The IANS and Artico Search 2026 State of the CISO report found nearly seven in ten CISOs were open to a career move within the next year, while 52% said their scope was no longer fully manageable. New security leaders often arrive with a mandate to close capability gaps, creating demand further down the function for architects, engineers and governance specialists who can design controls, secure AI platforms and establish appropriate policy and assurance. The bigger picture for cyber talent and how it's shifting The most in-demand cyber security roles Peoplebank worked on in FY26 were Security Engineers, Security Architects and cyber security support professionals. Demand also remains strong across cloud security, security operations, identity and access management, and governance, risk and compliance. The wider skills challenge is significant. ACS Digital Pulse 2026 backs this finding, showing 84% of workers had used AI tools, but only 7% demonstrated advanced AI literacy. Peoplebank data shows cyber security roles take an average of 33 days to fill, eight days longer than broader technology roles. In FY26, 84% of Peoplebank's cyber security placements were contract engagements and 16% permanent. That model reflects how many organisations are accessing specialist capability. AI security requirements are often tied to defined programs, from securing new platforms to establishing AI governance, making contract specialists, project teams and salaried consultant models valuable ways to access capability quickly. Turning investment into capability For boards approving greater cyber investment, the challenge is turning that budget into capability. The organisations that do this well: Get the leadership right. A CISO with a clear mandate, reporting line and budget can turn investment into a coherent security program. Link hiring to risk. If AI data exposure is a priority, fund roles with the expertise to address it. Blend contract and permanent talent. Bring in specialists for urgent programs while building a permanent core that retains knowledge. Invest in existing people. Upskilling security and risk teams in AI can complement external hiring for scarce skills. Move quickly. With cyber positions taking longer to fill, slow approvals and lengthy interview processes increase the risk of losing strong candidates. AI will continue to reshape the threat landscape. Leadership teams that invest in the people, not just the platforms, will be better placed to adopt it safely and turn cyber investment into genuine resilience. How Peoplebank can help Peoplebank partners with organisations across Australia to source cyber security capability across permanent, contract and workforce solutions, from analysts and engineers to architects, security leaders and project teams. Whether you're appointing a security leader, securing an AI platform or building internal capability, our specialists can help you find the right people. Contact Peoplebank to discuss your cyber security hiring requirements.
Team meeting in a bright office | Salary Guide
By Aniela R • October 19, 2026
Salary Guide, trends, hiring insights
Australians in jobs
By Aniela R • August 3, 2026
New data reveals how Australians move between jobs and what it means for employers and job seekers Australia's workforce is more dynamic than many people realise. New research from Jobs and Skills Australia highlights how workers move between occupations and industries throughout their careers, providing valuable insights for employers, recruiters and professionals planning their next career move. According to JSA's newly released Occupation Mobility Interactive Tool, career pathways are often far more interconnected than traditional job titles suggest. Careers are no longer linear One of the key findings from the report is that occupations tend to form clusters, with workers moving between roles that share similar skills and experience requirements. Rather than following a single, predictable career path, many Australians build careers through a series of lateral moves, stepping stones and transferable skill opportunities. For example, Australia's most common occupation, Sales Assistant (General), acts as a significant gateway role. Workers frequently transition into related customer service positions, while others leverage their experience to move into higher-skilled roles such as retail management, administration and clerical positions. The research identifies eight broad occupational mobility clusters across the labour market, including: Social, Education and Service Health Science and Research Engineering and ICT Other specialised occupational groups These clusters demonstrate that many careers are connected through transferable skills, creating opportunities for workers to pivot into new occupations without starting from scratch. Careers are like LEGO creations. Even when you dismantle one model, the individual blocks remain valuable and can be reassembled into something entirely new. Transferable skills are the pieces that make career pivots possible.
Contract work
By Aniela R • July 3, 2026
Peoplebank Australia | Beyond the Contract | Benefits
Peoplebank contractor working at a desk
By Mimi Petrakis • May 20, 2026
Learn how workforce sustainability impacts IT recruitment. Focus on retention & strategic planning for a resilient workforce.
Peoplebank contractor in a bright office
By Mimi Petrakis • May 5, 2026
Learn key strategies to retain top tech talent. Enhance engagement & culture for better retention. Contact us for expert recruitment solutions.
A cyber security ai specialists defending against AI fraud
By Dimitri P • March 31, 2026
AI voice cloning is eroding trust in financial services. Learn key risks, layered controls, and the cyber/AI talent needed, via Peoplebank FS specialists.
Remote and hybrid work trends in Australia’s tech industry: balancing high-paying digital jobs with
By Dimitri P • February 28, 2026
Discover if remote and hybrid tech jobs in Australia pay less, or if top digital talent can now have both high salaries and flexible work options in 2026.
Peoplebank Feb 2026 Salary Guide Insights - role and regional pay benchmarks across 13 tech sectors
By Dimitri P • January 31, 2026
Find out more about the Peoplebank Feb 2026 Salary Guide for role-level pay bands, state insights, trend analysis and recruiter commentary to set competitive offers.
2026 tech hiring: AI fluency, data & cybersecurity demand, and hiring for learning mindset
By Dimitri P • December 31, 2025
Sumi Dahal predicts 2026 tech hiring will prioritise AI fluency, data and cybersecurity roles, and favour candidates with curiosity and a growth mindset.