【文章标题】：Fair Work Commission condemns ‘plain wrong’ AI legal advice
公平工作委员会谴责”明显错误”的AI法律建议
【文章正文】：
Fair Work Commission condemns ‘plain wrong’ AI legal advice as cases with AI litigants surge
随着AI诉讼当事人激增，公平工作委员会谴责”明显错误”的AI法律建议
In short:
简讯：
A former ALDI worker seeking to challenge his dismissal in the Fair Work Commission has been criticised for bringing a doomed case that was informed by AI.
一名前ALDI员工试图通过公平工作委员会挑战解雇决定，因提交AI生成的败诉案件而受到批评。
Research commissioned by the workplace umpire shows its cases have recently grown by 40 per cent, in part due to litigants using AI.
该劳动仲裁机构委托的研究显示，近期案件量增长40%，部分归因于诉讼者使用AI。
What’s next?
后续措施：
From October 20, applicants to the Fair Work Commission will need to disclose AI use, while a template to help AI-dependent litigants has been implemented.
自10月20日起，公平工作委员会申请人需披露AI使用情况，同时已实施帮助依赖AI诉讼者的模板。
A sacked ALDI employee condemned by the Fair Work Commission for using “plain wrong” artificial intelligence (AI) advice in his failed bid to reverse his dismissal says he now plans to use “two or three” different AI agents to help him appeal against the decision.
被公平工作委员会谴责使用”明显错误”AI建议的前ALDI员工表示，现计划改用”两三个”不同AI代理协助上诉。该员工此前试图推翻解雇决定未果。
Sadnan Khan was ordered to pay $1,230 towards the supermarket giant’s legal fees after a landmark Fair Work Commission decision found he used AI as a “quasi-legal advisor” to challenge his dismissal, despite repeat warnings his case had “no substantial prospects of success”.
在具有里程碑意义的裁决中，公平工作委员会认定Sadnan Khan将AI作为”准法律顾问”挑战解雇决定，判其支付ALDI超市集团1,230澳元律师费。此前委员会多次警告其案件”毫无胜诉可能”。
“I have taken the very rare step of ordering him to pay some of the employer’s legal costs, because his unreasonable conduct caused his former employer to incur those costs unnecessarily,” Fair Work Commission deputy president Michael Easton said in the tribunal’s decision last week.
公平工作委员会副主席Michael Easton在裁决中表示：“我罕见地判决其承担部分雇主律师费，因其不合理行为导致前雇主产生不必要开支。”
“If Mr Khan had properly read his own AI generated replies … he would have known that his case was doomed."
"若Khan先生认真阅读AI生成的回复……就会知道其案件注定失败。”
Mr Khan told the ABC he used a paid version of ChatGPT to help him decipher legal cases the tribunal and ALDI had raised.
Khan向ABC表示，他使用付费版ChatGPT解读仲裁庭和ALDI援引的判例。
“They’re quoting me cases, right … and I as not a legal personality have to go somewhere to do the study,” he said.
”他们援引判例…而我作为非法律人士必须自学。”
“The main thing AI suffers is they do things not the Aussie [court] way."
"AI主要缺陷在于其不符合澳大利亚法庭程序。”
Mr Khan — originally from Bangladesh — said he was relying on AI advice to understand how to navigate the system, but admits he made mistakes — including forgetting to remove AI-chat instructions from his submissions.
这位孟加拉裔申请人承认依赖AI建议理解司法程序时犯错，包括未删除提交材料中的AI聊天指令。
“The way we communicate things and the legal way of communication … things are different,” he said.
”日常交流与法律文书表达…存在差异。”
Generative AI sees cases surge
生成式AI导致案件激增
The Fair Work Commission is designed to assist self-represented litigants, but a report commissioned by the workplace umpire showed a drastic uptick in cases.
公平工作委员会本为辅助自诉当事人设立，但报告显示案件量急剧上升。
Mr Khan contends comprehension barriers affected the prompts he fed his AI agent, but said he had now learned from the experience.
Khan认为理解障碍影响其给AI的指令，但表示已吸取教训。
“The main problem, which I realised after the hearing, was that I was thinking oranges were apples,” he said.
”庭审后我才发现根本问题是张冠李戴。”
“Now I’m going to use next time a mixture of Claude and ChatGPT … and two or three [others] to [get a] mixture of different views."
"下次将混合使用Claude、ChatGPT等两三个AI获取多元观点。”
The tribunal acknowledged AI was improving access to justice for applicants with genuine, meritorious claims “who might otherwise have been deterred”.
仲裁庭承认AI帮助有理据的申请人获得司法救济，这些人”原本可能望而却步”。
It denied AI use by applicants was inherently problematic and said sophisticated users had approached it critically as “one tool among many”.
委员会否认申请人使用AI本身有问题，称成熟使用者会批判性将其视作”众多工具之一”。
ChatGPT ‘terrible as oracle’
ChatGPT作为”神谕”糟糕透顶
Among that category is Gregory Baker, a computer科学讲师 from Macquarie University who this month became the first person to successfully challenge casual employment laws using a team of AI agents.
麦考瑞大学计算机科学讲师Gregory Baker本月成为首个借助AI团队成功挑战临时工法的案例。
“I used to be famous for saying to my students, ‘if you don’t use AI in my class, you will fail’,"
"我以对学生说’不在我课上用AI就会挂科’闻名。”
“When you’re teaching a class on AI, it makes sense."
"教授AI课程时这很合理。”
Mr Baker’s Fair Work claim was born when he asked ChatGPT for career planning options after the university denied his request to be converted from a sessional to permanent employee.
Baker向公平工作委员会申诉的起因，是大学拒绝将其合同工转正后向ChatGPT寻求职业规划建议。
“I treated it basically as a software development project,” he said.
”我将其视为软件开发项目。”
“I created a repository for my source code and my programs, which were my [tribunal] filings and came up with a build process that it checked.
”建立包含申诉材料的代码库，设计AI验证的构建流程。”
“Are all the citations correct? Is everything logically coherent? I made sure there was a process that it went through.
”确保引文准确、逻辑连贯，建立完整校验流程。”
“That obviously has enormous implications for how institutions operate, for how the legal systems work."
"这对机构运作和司法体系影响深远。”
But he said asking ChatGPT as a “kind of oracle” with no context or information resulted in “a terrible job.”
但他指出，将ChatGPT当作无背景信息的”神谕”会导致糟糕结果。
Mr Baker estimated that there was roughly a five-year window between the AI frontier, which had “good framing and prompting” compared with the least sophisticated, and often free, models, which could drive inequality.
Baker估计尖端AI与简陋免费模型存在约五年差距，“优质框架和提示”可能加剧不平等。
“There are a lot of people for whom hundreds of dollars a month on AI is completely out of the question,” he said.
”许多人根本负担不起每月数百美元的AI费用。”
Mr Baker did not realise he was among the first cases testing new employee choice laws introduced last year until a week or two before the hearings, where he was up against a lawyer and barrister representing the university.
直到听证会前一两周，Baker才意识到自己成为测试新《雇员选择法》的首批案例，对阵大学聘请的出庭律师。
He said he used ChatGPT to “grill” him to prepare for cross-examination at the tribunal hearing, but admitted, “things did not go the way I was expecting.”
他用ChatGPT模拟法庭盘问训练，但承认”实际情况与预期不符”。
“Of course, it’s a huge disadvantage in any oral hearing,"
"口头听证中这显然是巨大劣势。”
How can courts, tribunals manage AI litigants?
法院和仲裁庭如何应对AI诉讼者？