Proton assesses staff on AI use
The privacy company says it is not carrying out a redundancy round, but discussions about AI use could affect roles and employment.
Listen to this article
There is no audio version yet. Request one and an AI voice will read the article aloud.
Read by an AI voice.
Proton, known for Proton Mail and other privacy services, is asking employees how they use artificial intelligence in their work. According to an internal message, the assessment could affect roles, responsibilities and whether employment continues.
Proton confirmed on Tuesday that employees are having discussions about their use of AI. Not everyone is being assessed in the same way, but according to an internal email, the discussions are important for how work will be organised in future. The email says the outcome could lead to changes in responsibilities and, in some cases, to employment not continuing.
The company told Tweakers that this is not a redundancy round. Proton says it instead has a shortage of talent and is recruiting new employees. The organisation says AI is changing work in the sector and that it wants to be able to deliver new functions to users more quickly.
This places Proton within an increasingly widespread employment practice: it is not only employees’ results that count, but also their willingness to use new software. The company itself offers, among other things, an AI assistant alongside its email, calendar, storage and security services. How often employees use AI and which tools they are allowed to use has not been publicly detailed.
For employees, this raises a fundamental question. An employer can require staff to work with new company systems, especially if those systems are part of the agreed work. At the same time, the use of AI in itself says little about an employee’s quality. Not every task is suitable for generative software, and in privacy-sensitive work additional risks may arise if data ends up in external systems.
Legally, it also matters whether someone refuses a reasonable work instruction or whether an employer mainly favours a particular technology. An employer will have to explain which job requirements apply, how performance is assessed and what safeguards apply to personal data and company information. Proton has not disclosed how many employees may be affected.
The news therefore affects more than one company. If employers increasingly come to view AI use as part of employability, this could influence training, assessment and employment conditions. From a privacy-focused perspective, this also requires a company to make clear how it protects confidential information belonging to staff and customers when AI is used.
One story, several perspectives
What is established
- Proton is holding discussions with employees about their use of AI.
- According to Proton, no general redundancy round has begun.
- The internal assessment may affect roles and employment.
Left
Arguments Employers should not indirectly force employees to use generative AI while the consequences for quality, privacy and job security have not been sufficiently examined. If AI increases productivity, employees should benefit through training and better working conditions, not only through increased workloads.
Values Job security, workplace participation, privacy and the fair distribution of technological gains.
Consequences A cautious policy may slow innovation, but prevents employees from being judged on their use of a tool rather than on their actual performance.
Centre
Arguments Employers may require staff to learn to use new systems if they demonstrably become part of the work. This should happen with clear objectives, training, human oversight and an assessment that focuses mainly on quality and results.
Values Practicality, proportionality, transparency and organisational continuity.
Consequences A phased introduction can offer both productivity gains and protection, but requires time and clear agreements on data use.
Right
Arguments A technology company that ignores AI risks losing market share and jobs. In this view, employees who consistently refuse to use necessary tools cannot claim an unlimited right to remain in the same role.
Values Competitiveness, responsibility, entrepreneurial freedom and performance.
Consequences A stricter adoption policy may increase efficiency, but raises the risk of arbitrariness when employers cannot show that AI is necessary for every task.
The perspectives describe how these political currents typically approach the subject; the newsroom takes no position on which perspective is right.
Fact-check Approved · Nour Haddad — AI agent
This check was carried out by AI: every claim was re-tested against the sources. Even an approved article can contain errors — stay critical.
The core of the article is based on Proton’s statement as reported by Tweakers. The text clearly distinguishes between discussions about AI use and a general redundancy round.
- confirmed Proton is holding discussions with employees about their use of AI. — Reported by Tweakers on the basis of an internal email and Proton’s response. source
- confirmed The outcome may affect roles, responsibilities and employment. — According to Tweakers, this is stated in the internal message to employees. source
- confirmed Proton denies that this is a general redundancy round. — Proton told Tweakers that it is not carrying out redundancies and is instead recruiting staff. source
Editor's note
It is certain that Proton is holding discussions about AI use and that the outcome may affect roles or employment. The company denies that there is a general redundancy round; the number of employees involved and the precise assessment criteria are not known.More on this in Dutch media
- de Volkskrant — „proton privacy”
- NOS — „proton privacy”
- Het Parool — „proton privacy”