Fianna Fáil TD for Kildare North, Naoise Ó Cearúil, has proposed a policy to government colleagues aimed at supporting workers whose jobs are at risk from artificial intelligence and automation.
Deputy Ó Cearúil is calling for the establishment of a National AI Workforce Transition Programme to help employees in AI-exposed roles retrain and move into higher-value employment before redundancies occur.
The proposal places a particular emphasis on retaining workers within their existing sectors and, where possible, with their current employers.
The proposal follows recent developments involving Meta and its outsourcing partner Covalen, alongside new analysis combining data from the Central Statistics Office and estimates from the Economic and Social Research Institute.
The analysis indicates that between 25% and 40% of tasks across key sectors could be exposed to automation in the coming years, potentially affecting between 30,000 and 48,000 workers.
Speaking on his proposal, Deputy Ó Cearúil said:
“Recent comments from Mark Zuckerberg on the future size of teams in an AI-driven world are a clear cause for concern. We are already seeing the impact of AI, particularly among workers in financial services back offices, customer contact centres and compliance operations, where exposure to displacement is highest.
“These sectors are the starting point for this proposal because the evidence of disruption is strongest and the window for proactive action is narrow. However, the programme is designed to expand as further evidence emerges across the economy.
“I believe we need a national pilot programme developed by the State in partnership with industry, similar to initiatives seen in Singapore, where a government-backed AI reskilling programme upskilled 80,000 workers and increased sector productivity by 12%.
“Early intervention is critical. It preserves the tax base, retains experienced workers in productive employment and sends a clear signal to international investors that Ireland is managing technological change responsibly.
“By contrast, relying on redundancy supports is more costly, delivers weaker employment outcomes and risks damaging our reputation as a forward-looking economy.”
END
Notes to Editor:
Under the proposal: