Thank you for that question.
I'm not sure that I'm necessarily making an argument that we bridge the gap with technology when it comes to labour shortages right across the economy, but I think what's necessary to understand is that there are possibilities, certainly with artificial intelligence, where we can replace workers in a number of industries and some really surprising ones too.
What's essential before we move down that road is to really have a firm understanding of where the use of automation is appropriate. It's not just where does it harm workers, but where does it just not make economic sense to deploy at this point? Essentially what we're asking for as an organization is for the federal government to undertake a study of artificial intelligence and the possibilities that exist for various sectors, where it makes sense and where it doesn't make sense.
In terms of regulatory reforms, we're looking at specific sector reforms rather than just a broad approach in terms of protecting workers or enabling businesses to deploy technology.
I don't have a direct answer to your question in terms of regulatory reforms but we're looking at specific sectors to develop their own.
One of the examples that we have been looking to as a progressive template is the Port of Seattle. They've developed a code of ethics for the use of biometrics and the different types of technologies that are being used across airports, not just in Canada and the U.S. but globally. Essentially that code of ethics applies to anybody operating in the aerodrome. It's not just a code of ethics in terms of how employers or how the airport authorities anticipate it to behave, but it really spells out roles and responsibilities in terms of how the technology is handled and how it impacts upon passengers, workers and airline carriers. It asks some of the broader questions.
When we talk about reforms I think it's important to look at them from the perspective of sectors but also to develop something that works, something that's not just an impediment for employers to implement the technology, because it may be necessary. We want a full understanding, but we also want some assurances that there's no harm that comes out of these technologies.