AI fuels ‘unrealistic expectations’ in employment disputes – lawyer

Artificial intelligence is increasingly changing human behaviour in employment disputes, a senior lawyer believes.

Ben Doherty, a Partner and Head of Employment Law at Scottish legal firm Lindsays, says information from the likes of ChatGPT is not only leading to more claims being raised with employers, but transforming the dynamic of them.

He and colleagues are also seeing growing evidence that AI search answers are leaving some with unrealistic expectations around what the claims may be worth.

This, they believe, is sometimes reducing the likelihood of financial settlement, as employers are more willing to incur the cost of defending the claim than settle at unrealistic levels.

Mr Doherty said: “Not only are the number of grievances changing, but the style of them too.

“They are essentially becoming longer and more convoluted because people are relying on content from AI when drafting their grievance and when submitting an appeal.

“The challenge with that is the responses are not specific to their circumstances and are frequently incorrect.”

People’s approach and reactions to legal realities at play are also being shaped by the AI responses.

“There is no doubt that human behaviour is often affected,” Mr Doherty added.

“For all of the benefits that AI brings, it does not give objective human advice. The significant downside is that you can often keep asking questions until you essentially get the answer you are looking for – even if it is incorrect or not relevant to an individual’s issue.

“People can feel empowered by the answers they receive and behave as though the information they have garnered is correct – leading them to continue with claims which have no merit.”

Even in cases that progress to settlement, there can be negative financial implications.

Mr Doherty explained: “We have seen people reject sensible settlement offers and lose out as a result. Because ChatGPT does not appreciate the litigation risk that lawyers factor into cases, some people have rejected sensible offers, which a lawyer would have advised them to accept, and proceeded to a Tribunal hearing, which they have lost – because AI answers have given them a false impression of what their case is worth.

“While AI can be a useful starting point for research, it should be taken as simply that. In employment disputes, there is no real substitute for human interaction and advice tailored to your own circumstances.”

Lindsays lawyers are seeing a growing number of cases where people are using ChatGPT to draft pleadings and research the law around their cases, with mixed results. Common mistaken wording is used in repeated cases.

And, while they say there are benefits to the ease of AI in high-level research to help ensure fair working environments, they warn that there are also pitfalls.

They include the fact that some people are presenting information which is not relevant to UK employment law, or repeating inaccurate advice shared in the likes of online chat forums.

“AI tools do not take into account the nuances that come with every individual case,” Mr Doherty said. “It is therefore easy either to be wrong-footed from the outset or find a case being dismissed as you enter the tribunal process because legal thresholds cannot be met.

“Every tribunal claim has an element of litigation risk, and no experienced lawyer will ever give their client a guarantee that they will be successful. Individuals are becoming more absolute in their behaviour and resolve because of AI – and not always to their benefit.” 

During a meeting of the Employment Tribunals (Scotland) National User Group last year (2025), it was confirmed that members had noticed a rise in the number of tribunal claims.

The most recent Ministry of Justice statistics show that the open caseload of live employment tribunals has increased by 1.5% to 531,000.

During the last quarter analysed, 54,400 new tribunal cases – covering both single and multiple claims – were filed, with the current open caseload for single claims up by 55% on the previous year.

Mr Doherty added: “The tribunal system was already not without its pressures in managing the number of cases brought before it. The use of AI – and the false expectations it can create for claimants – is adding to that.

“While fair and legal working practices must be upheld, businesses are also facing added pressures because they must follow due process for all formal grievances, even if the basis for them might be misinformed.”

Lindsay’s lawyers, working from offices in Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dundee, Perth, and Crieff, support clients with all aspects of employment law.