BLOG
AI grievances | How employers can respond to questionable complaints
Written by Daniel Rawcliffe on 16 September 2025
Picture this: you receive a grievance from an employee. It’s lengthy, formal, and packed with references to employment law and case law. At first glance, it seems well put together – almost too well put together – and something about it doesn’t feel quite right.
What’s more, the detail in the grievance doesn’t seem to align with the reality of the situation, and the employee is refusing to meet in person, insisting that the matter be handled in writing.
If this sounds familiar, you may be dealing with a ‘GIT’ – a grievance invented by technology. It’s just one example of how AI is increasingly being misused in the workplace.
At WorkNest, we’re receiving an increasing number of enquiries from clients who suspect their employees may be turning to AI tools such as ChatGPT to draft their grievances. And it doesn’t stop there – we’ve also seen AI used in appeals, responses to emails, and, perhaps more concerningly, in outcome letters prepared by managers. In one Employment Tribunal case, there was even suspicion that the opposing party’s expert report had been produced largely by AI.
So, how can employers spot – and respond to – complaints crafted by AI?
Do you need support?
Speak to us for an honest, no obligation chat on:
0345 226 8393 Lines are open 9am – 5pm
AI grievances: An emerging trend?
Many of the enquiries we’re receiving from clients in relation to questionable grievances follow a similar pattern. In practice, we’re hearing that:
- The grievance tends to be unusually long, detailed, and formal.
- It’s often raised in the middle of an investigation into the employee’s conduct or performance.
- In many cases, the employee is reluctant to attend face-to-face meetings, requesting instead that grievance or disciplinary processes be conducted entirely in writing.
Taken together, these patterns may suggest that the employee has used AI tools like ChatGPT or Co-pilot to draft the grievance.
Why are AI grievances a problem for employers?
A key issue with employees using AI to draft grievances is that minor incidents can be blown out of proportion. Innocuous actions or behaviours may be presented as bullying, sexual harassment, or discrimination, creating a distorted view of the situation.
AI can take minor incidents and exaggerate, embellish, or reinterpret them. As a result, when an employer receives a GIT, it’s not always clear which parts reflect what actually happened and which have been ‘enhanced’ by AI. This creates uncertainty, making it harder to assess the true nature of the grievance and respond appropriately.
What makes this even more problematic is the ease and speed with which AI tools can generate paragraphs of detailed, persuasive text. Employees who might not have otherwise taken the time to raise a formal grievance can now spin up convincing complaints in a matter of seconds, increasing the likelihood that grievances are submitted.
The challenge is compounded by the fact that many GITs are submitted during ongoing disciplinary, redundancy, or other sensitive processes. Employees often turn to AI when they feel threatened about their job, which can result in grievances that are highly detailed and, again, inflated. Employers must investigate these curveball grievances – carefully separating fact from embellishment – while simultaneously managing the original process. Naturally, this increases the complexity and sensitivity of the situation.
The difficulty for employers is that, unless there is a clear reason not to, a GIT must be treated as a genuine grievance and investigated accordingly. Even when a GIT is excessively long and includes references to incidents that either didn’t occur or have been overblown, each element still needs to be carefully considered and, where possible, resolved. This, of course, can take up valuable time and resources.
How to spot AI grievances
Given the proliferation of AI, particularly on social media, many of us have developed a sense of whether content has been AI-generated. Of course, not everyone is familiar with AI-generated content or skilled at recognising its hallmarks.
With the rise of employees using AI at work, you’ll want to look out for telltale signs that text may be AI-generated. Signs include:
- American spelling, e.g. “behavior” instead of “behaviour”, “organization” instead of “organisation”, and “favoritism” instead of “favouritism”.
- American grammar, e.g. placing commas or full stops inside quotation marks (“like this.”) rather than outside (“like this”), or treating collective nouns as singular (“the team is” vs British English “the team are”).
- Frequent use of em dashes (—) instead of standard punctuation, such as commas, colons, or semi-colons.
- Overused stock phrases or transitions, such as “in conclusion”, “it is important to note” or “as mentioned above”.
- An overly formal or unnatural tone, particularly from individuals who would not normally communicate that way.
- Vague or generic content, such as claims lacking specifics, unrealistic examples, or no reference to personal experience or context.
- Conditional or hedging language, such as “this could amount to discrimination” or “this may be a protected disclosure”.
- Repetition of ideas or synonyms, where the same point is made multiple times in slightly different words.
- Overly balanced or neutral tone, even when the topic might naturally invite opinion or emotion.
Recognising these patterns can help you identify when a grievance may have been AI-generated.
How should employers deal with AI grievances?
AI isn’t going away, and employees will continue to use – and sometimes misuse – it. To manage the rise in AI-generated grievances:
Trust your instincts
Learn the common signs of AI-generated text so you can spot them more easily, and if something feels off, run it through an AI detection tool to confirm or disprove your concerns.
Compare notes
If you suspect a grievance has been AI-generated, review it alongside other documents or communications from the employee to see whether it’s consistent with their usual language/style.
Seek expert advice
If you’re unsure, share the document with a legal or HR specialist for a second opinion. WorkNest can support you in identifying AI-generated grievances and advise on the most appropriate and efficient way to handle them.
Be proactive
Review and update your grievance policy to ensure that any grievance requires a face-to-face meeting. This is something WorkNest can assist with. Remember, in some cases, a remote meeting may be a reasonable adjustment.
What you shouldn’t do is dismiss a grievance simply because it appears AI-generated. Even if the text has been drafted with AI, the concerns raised may still be genuine. Every grievance should be treated seriously until there is reason to believe otherwise.
Get help with your workplace AI policies
If you’re facing a similar situation in your workplace, WorkNest can:
- Review AI-generated grievances, helping you identify what’s substantive and what’s ‘noise’.
- Advise on policy updates to manage the rise of GITs.
- Support you in responding proportionately and legally to grievances that feel ‘off’.
- Train managers to handle grievances confidently and consistently, while avoiding common pitfalls.
We can also guide you through more typical grievance processes, as well as other AI-related challenges, ensuring you handle all employee matters confidently and compliantly.
For support, contact our team today on 0345 226 8393 or request your free consultation using the button below.
Related Content
FREE WEBINAR
