This article is a little life lesson on trust in resources. It is loosely based on a question we received from one of our members: Are Wisconsin employers required to provide refrigeration for expressed breast milk? Seems like a simple-enough question, hey?
For those who like quick self-help services, we cannot deny that Artificial Intelligence (AI) is now considered a go-to resource. AI is publicly available at any time of day. It’s fast, friendly, and often provides citations that give us a boost of confidence.
So, I took this question and did a little experiment. I am glad I did!
First, I tried Google AI. Here is the response I received:
“Yes, Wisconsin law requires employers to provide access to a refrigerator (or allow a cooler) for storing expressed breast milk, plus an outlet and running water, as part of providing reasonable break time for nursing mothers, with some exceptions for small businesses facing undue hardship under proposed legislation, though the federal PUMP Act also provides protections … Wisconsin legislation (like AB 193 & proposed AB 436/SB 430) mandates employers offer:
- Reasonable break time to express milk.
- A private space, not a bathroom, shielded from view.
- Access to an electrical outlet, running water, and a refrigerator for milk storage.”
Looks legit, right? Well, it’s sort of legit. Here, AI was scraping proposed legislation from publicly available websites and mixing that up with legislation that was passed. In Wisconsin, AB 193 (2017) never passed. Attempts in Wisconsin to have a state-mandated employment policy for employers with nursing mother-employees have been tried but have failed.
I wouldn’t blame someone for taking this information and running with it. The provided answer seemed to check a lot of boxes. The summary and sources provided all seemed very legitimate. And, fortunately, the advice provided was more employee-friendly than required, and therefore, less risky. If the AI guidance had said “no,” that could be problematic. In this particular case, there might be other variables and laws to consider. For example, a refrigerator might be a reasonable accommodation under Wisconsin’s Fair Employment law and/or the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act.
ChatGPT took this question very literally and perhaps provided a more accurate answer. But it missed the potential for accommodation under the two laws I just mentioned. When I asked ChatGPT why, it provided this answer.
“Your original question was narrowly framed around whether Wisconsin employers are required to provide refrigeration for expressed breast milk.”
Fair enough, and that is the same response my friend who hails from the planet Vulcan gave me. The point here is … literal answers aren’t always the right answer, or the full answer. Like any automated system or application, it is treating your correspondence the same way a calculator does numbers. If you put 2+2 in a calculator, you will get 4. We can’t blame the calculator for not knowing you needed to carry out the answer a couple of decimals.
These AI flaws are all great selling points for human oversight—in this case, our amazing HR Hotline. If you are a member who wants to connect with one of our HR Advisors for some amazing compliance guidance (and maybe to fact-check AI), we’d be happy to! Contact us anytime, 24/7. Not a member? Find out how to become one here.
And, while this article gives some words of caution, it is not intended to discredit AI at large. As we are finding, AI is a valuable tool in our toolbox; one that must be used wisely, by those who understand it.
