'AI Won't Replace Lawyers, But It Will Redefine Their Roles': Legal Expert Gerald Manoharan On Job Cuts, Workforce Rights & India's New AI Bill

As artificial intelligence (AI) continues to reshape industries worldwide, fears of job displacement are mounting across sectors, including the legal profession. Concerns about automation replacing entry-level roles, particularly for freshers and junior staff, have sparked debates about workforce transitions, ethical AI use, and legal compliance. In this exclsuive interview with Gerald (Jerry) Manoharan, Partner at JSA Advocates & Solicitors, one of the top national legal firms in India, we explore the transformative effects of AI on the legal sector, focusing on its implications on jobs, the legal obligations of employers, and strategies for ethical AI integration. We also delve into India’s proactive steps to address these challenges, including the establishment of a dedicated task force under the Ministry of Labour and Employment and the introduction of The Workforce Rights (Artificial Intelligence) Bill, 2023. These initiatives reflect India’s commitment to balancing technological advancement with workforce protection, ensuring a sustainable and inclusive future for its labour market.

1. A recent report suggests that AI will displace junior legal staff and freshers as there are several platforms that can now draft contracts, perform document reviews, and conduct case law research with up to 88 percent accuracy. What is your view on this?

Gerald: AI systems, such as generative language models, are increasingly capable of performing tasks like drafting documents, reviewing materials and conducting research with notable speed and accuracy. However, they are unlikely to fully replace entry-level professionals. While these tools excel at processing large volumes of information, they continue to struggle with context specific interpretation, ethical reasoning and strategic decision making. As a result, junior professionals will see many routine and administrative tasks automated allowing them to focus more on oversight of AI outputs. Organisations adopting AI must ensure strong human oversight to uphold quality, judgement and accountability.

2. During layoffs, what are the legal obligations of Indian employers when implementing AI or automation that could result in job displacement or redundancy?

Gerald: In India when employers implement AI or automation that leads to job displacement or redundancy, they must comply with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. This includes providing one month’s notice or wages in lieu and retrenchment compensation to affected workers as well as adhering to procedures for prior notice and government approval in certain cases (especially in industrial establishments employing 100 or more workers). Importantly all layoffs must be non-discriminatory in nature. While the law does not explicitly mention AI or technological upgrades as grounds for retrenchment, introduction of labor-saving devices which includes automation and new technologies has been recognised by courts as a valid reason for retrenchment, provided that due process is followed. However, the burden is on the employer to show that the retrenchment is genuine, necessary and not a façade for unfair dismissal.

3.  What guidance do you offer to Indian companies to ensure ethical, fair, and legally compliant use of AI in their workforce management?

Gerald: For companies, the most clear-cut question arises: do they re-train and retain the existing workforce, or reduce and restructure, in an attempt to be lean and efficient in their AI-enhanced operations? Some may do this. Others may not. At this juncture, it is worthwhile to note the developments that are happening at Meta. Mark Zuckerberg opined the possibility of laying off 5 percent of the company’s workforce, mainly comprising of mid-level engineers as the cost of their employability was greater than the costs involved in utilising AI for the same. This facet of change can be seen in Google and Microsoft, where layoffs are being effected due to the incorporation of AI in various capacities. However, for some, the priority will simply be grounded in cost and the automation of manual labour, and where it is not cost-effective, labour will be preferred. A more sustainable path forward would be to look into up skilling programs, which would need to go beyond generic training and focus on building AI literacy, domain-specific tech fluency, and cross-functional agility. Companies must also learn to balance efficiency with workforce responsibility, leveraging AI to augment rather than replace human potential. Thoughtfully invested human-AI collaboration can not only yield higher output and productivity but also, a more sustainable workforce that is steeled for the future.

4.   Are there anticipated legislative changes in India aimed at regulating the impact of AI on employment or workforce rights?

Gerald: India has taken proactive steps to address the evolving impact of AI on the future work. A dedicated task force has been established under the Ministry of Labour and Employment to examine the implications of AI on employment, workplace practices and overall labour dynamics. The objective is to assess both the opportunities and challenges posed by AI adoption and to develop appropriate policy frameworks that can guide the responsible and inclusive integration of AI technologies across sectors

A private member’s bill titled The Workforce Rights (Artificial intelligence) Bill, 2023 was introduced by the Rajya Sabha-the bill seeks to safeguard worker’s rights in context of increasing AI deployment in the workplace. Key provisions proposed include ensuring transparency in the use of AI systems, obtaining informed employee consent prior to the deployment of AI tools, mandating employer obligations for upskilling and reskilling of workers potentially affected by automation, granting employees the right to contest or refuse decisions solely by AI systems.

5. How should multinational companies operating in India align global AI policies with local labour and employment laws?

Gerald: As companies increasingly integrate AI into their human resource functions, from screening resumes and conducting video interviews, to monitoring employee productivity and making promotion or termination decisions, it becomes essential to address the ethical and legal implications of such use. AI systems, if not properly designed and monitored, can interfere with matters relating to gender, caste, race, age or disability, especially when trained on historical or non-representative data. To mitigate these risks companies should adopt clear AI governance policies that prioritise transparency, accountability and fairness. These policies must ensure that all AI driven employment decisions remain compliant with the existing labour laws, incorporate regular audits, and maintain human oversight at every critical stage especially in hiring, performance evaluations and terminations.

6. Are there any India-specific compliance requirements or notifications that companies must follow before automating roles previously performed by humans?

Gerald: To ensure responsible and lawful deployment of AI in the workplace, it is essential to localse compliance frameworks in alignment with existing Indian legal regulatory standards. This involves adapting governance practices to reflect key national legislations such as Industrial Disputes Act, The Data Protection Act and other labour and technology related statutes. Obtaining informed employee consent particularly in scenarios involving personal data processing or automated decision making is another key aspect that ensures employees retain agency and understand how AI tools may influence their work and professional development. Regular legal and ethical audits of AI systems should be institutionalised to evaluate compliance, fairness and data protection standards. Overall, a well-regulated AI compliance framework not only mitigates legal risks but also promotes a more equitable, transparent and employee centric approach to AI integration in the Indian workforce.

7. How does Indian law address reskilling or up skilling obligations for employees displaced due to AI technology?

Gerald: The Government of India actively promotes reskilling, through national initiatives such as Skill India Mission and Digital India, which aim to equip the workforce to adapt to emerging technologies (AI). These programs encourage the public and private sector stakeholders to invest in skill development as a means to support smooth workforce transition. OrganiSations voluntarily adopt such practices as part of their corporate social responsibility and sustainable business operations. This reflects a forward approach that balances technological advancement with human capital development fostering long term organisational resilience and social responsibility.

8. Has there been any recent litigation or regulatory scrutiny in India related to AI-driven job cuts or alleged unfair dismissals?

Gerald: In India there are no landmark cases regarding AI driven job layoffs. However, the topic is being addressed in some of the parliamentary discussions showing the rising scrutiny of the issue.

9. Does Indian labour law provide any specific protections or compensation guidelines for employees whose roles are automated by AI?

Gerald: At present, Labour Laws do not contain specific provisions addressing compensation or protection for employees affected by job losses resulting directly from AI automation or technological displacement. However, under existing laws such as Industrial Disputes Act, protection may apply if such job losses are categorized as retrenchment. Outside these provisions there is no legal obligation for employers to compensate or protect employees specifically laid off due to AI integration. This gap highlights the evolving challenges posed by automation and AI in workplace. As AI adoption accelerates there is a growing need for policy evolution to ensure that workforce transitions are managed responsibly.