Grievances written using AI: The new HR challenge employers cannot afford to ignore

Employees are increasingly using generative AI tools to help write lengthy and legalistic grievances about problems at work. We highlight the challenges this creates for employers and how we can help.

Many employers are allowing staff to use generative AI tools at work, and employees are increasingly using the same tools to draft their grievances. Whilst AI can help people organise their thoughts and present their concerns more clearly, it also creates new challenges for employers. 

The challenges of grievances generated using AI

Lengthier grievances and correspondence - Generative AI makes it far easier for employees to draft a workplace complaint. Employees no longer need to invest significant time in working out how best to convey their concerns and instead can put a few words into an AI tool and receive a detailed and lengthy grievance within seconds. 

The result? More grievances submitted than previously; longer, more complex complaints; and increased administrative burden and investigation time for HR. HR teams are now finding themselves spending significant time unpicking AI‑generated wording, which may be lengthy and repetitive, to identify the core issues. While employees should always feel able to raise concerns, the impact of AI is creating backlogs and procedural strain for already busy HR teams.

Legalistic grievances - A growing concern among HR professionals is that AI‑generated grievances often read like legal claims. They tend to use formal and legalistic language and reframe routine workplace issues as legal wrongs, such as harassment or discrimination. What might have been a simple issue becomes framed as a potential policy breach or legal claim.

AI tools are also known to invent or misapply the law. Legal content in a grievance may prove to be irrelevant, based on a misapplication of the law or even completely false. This can raise an employee’s expectations and make a grievance harder to resolve.

Exacerbation of the issues - The use of AI may amplify the issues and broaden the accusations or add issues the employee would not otherwise have raised. This can exacerbate and complicate the issues for HR to unpick and attempt to resolve.

When a grievance reads like a solicitor‑drafted document, managers can react defensively. Some common consequences include reduced willingness to explore informal resolution routes, a more legalistic or adversarial tone to early conversations and premature or unnecessary escalation into the formal grievance process. This can undermine early intervention, which is often the quickest and most effective path to resolving workplace issues.

Risk of factual inaccuracies - AI occasionally fills gaps or provides detail that may sound plausible but is incorrect. This may inadvertently introduce false or misleading assertions into the grievance, complicating the investigation and muddying the issues. It also makes it harder for the employer to ascertain what the employee’s real concerns are. 

Lack of factual details - Before AI, grievances typically focused on the factual allegations which made it more straight-forward for the employer to understand the basis of the complaint and investigate it. AI generated grievances tend to lack the factual information an employer needs to know in order to investigate the grievance and decide the outcome. This gives rise to new challenges for employers to ascertain the details they need to know.

Authenticity and consistency issues - AI tools can produce a coherent narrative on paper, but they often do not reflect the employee’s own voice. HR teams may struggle to assess tone, sincerity and intent.

Employees may not recognise or understand the wording of their grievance. During follow-up meetings, employees sometimes struggle to elaborate on the precise claims they “made”, because the wording came from AI, and not from them. There may be a reluctance to have in-person discussions at all, where employees become reliant on AI to respond to points put to them by their employer.

Data protection and confidentiality concerns - Employees may input sensitive workplace information into AI tools, which can raise confidentiality and data protection concerns.

How employers can respond

Clyde & Co has developed a fixed-fee solution to support organisations in managing the growing challenge of AI-drafted grievances. This includes targeted grievance policy wording and practical guidance for HR teams on handling grievances drafted with the assistance of AI tools. Please contact James Major or your usual Clyde & Co contact for further information.

Conclusion

AI written grievances are here to stay. For HR teams, the challenge is not to resist this shift but to take steps to adapt and manage it pragmatically. AI may have changed the way grievances look, but it hasn’t changed the fundamentals of how to handle a grievance fairly. By ensuring procedural fairness, and focusing on human dialogue, employers can reduce risk while supporting a positive workplace culture.
 
Keep in mind that behind every grievance - AI-generated or not - is an employee with real experiences. An employer’s role remains the same: listen, investigate, and handle grievances fairly.
 
For more information or to find out more about our fixed fee offering, please contact James Major or your usual Clyde & Co contact.