AI ‘digital Twins’ In The Workplace: The Legal And Ethical Risks

The idea of digital twins at work sounds enticing for under-pressure teams facing increasing workloads. But organisations must think carefully about the legal and cultural implications of these AI assistants, explains Clare Brennan. 

The emergence of AI “digital twins” in the workplace poses a challenge that employment law is still catching up with.

They are systems trained to replicate an individual employee’s communication style, judgement patterns and decision-making.

Unlike traditional automation, which replaces tasks, digital twins go further: they attempt to replicate the employee’s professional identity.

For HR, this moves the issue from technology deployment into the heart of the employment relationship.

It raises a fundamental question: when an employer can model and redeploy an employee’s behaviour and judgement, who controls that asset and on what terms?

Legal standing

Employment law has traditionally drawn a relatively clear line: employees provide the work, and employers own (subject to contract) the intellectual property created in the course of employment.

Digital twins blur that line. They are not simply outputs created by employees, but models built from them including their way of thinking and how they communicate and make decisions.

This creates a new type of asset that sits somewhere between personal data, skills, and intellectual property.
For HR teams, this creates both legal risk and workplace challenges.

Contracts and expectations

Many employment contracts include wide-ranging IP and confidentiality provisions. However, very few explicitly address the creation of AI systems trained on employee behaviour.

This creates uncertainty. Employers may assume that data generated at work can be used to build AI tools.

Employees, however, may see the creation of a digital twin as something entirely different, particularly where their personal style or judgement is being replicated.

This disconnect is likely to play out in the workplace. Employees may seek additional protections and clarity on how their data is used including requiring new forms of compensation such as royalty/usage-based payments or enhanced redundancy style protections where their role is reduced.

Digital twins and AI

Scientists build HR tool to prepare for ‘digital twins’

What is agentic AI and should HR be using it?

And there is also the issue of what happens if an employee refuses to participate in creating a digital twin. In most cases, unless there is clear contractual wording requiring cooperation, refusal is unlikely to amount to a fundamental breach of contract.

Attempting to compel participation without a legal basis could create risk for the employer, including grievances, breakdown in employee relations, and potentially constructive dismissal claims.

From an HR perspective, this is critical. Digital twin initiatives may feel like a technology rollout, but in reality they represent a change to the nature of work requiring consultation and communication.

Data use and employee trust

The issue is particularly sensitive when it comes to data use. Information collected for everyday work may later be used to build a digital twin, raising questions about whether such use falls within employees’ reasonable expectations, particularly in a UK GDPR context.

Early case law or guidance may play a significant role in shaping how far employers can go.

Issues around data retention also arise when an employee leaves and a digital twin continues to be used.
For HR, this is not just a compliance issue. It is a trust issue. If employees feel that their data is being used in ways they did not anticipate, it can damage employee confidence and trust.

Job security and morale

Digital twins also have a direct impact on how employees view their role and future within the organisation. Employees may worry that a system trained on their own performance could reduce or replace their role. Even where this is not the intention, the perception alone can reduce morale and affect retention.

For HR personnel, the focus should not be on whether digital twins will emerge (they already are) but on how to manage them responsibly and effectively.

Key steps include:

• reviewing the contractual framework of the employment relationship (ensuring employment contracts and policies clearly address AI use);
• strengthen transparency (provide clear, accessible explanations of how employee data will be used and how any digital twin will operate);
• assess employee relations risk (consider the impact on morale, retention and trust, particularly where roles may evolve or diminish);
• consider whether compensation, recognition or role redesign is appropriate.

Looking ahead, it is likely that these issues will begin to surface in tribunal claims and regulatory scrutiny, particularly where employees challenge the use of their data or the impact on their roles.

Early case law or guidance may play a significant role in shaping how far employers can go.

In practice, organisations that approach digital twins as a people issue, not just a technology issue, are likely to be better placed to manage both legal and cultural risk.

Originally published by Personnel Today.