The RCN opposes the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in NHS job evaluation (JE). JE must remain a human-led, partnership-based process that recognises the complexity and nuances of nursing roles. The use of AI in JE undermines core NHS values of fairness, transparency, and equity, and risks deepening inequalities in the workforce.

Please also read the advice from the NHS Staff Council Job Evaluation Group (JEG) on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in job evaluation processes.

1. Background – what is JE?

The NHS Job Evaluation (JE) scheme under Agenda for Change (AfC) underpins fair, consistent and legally robust pay determination for NHS staff. Developed through partnership working between employers and trade unions, the scheme ensures that pay is based on the demands of the job, not the person doing it — and that the process is transparent, explainable, and is rooted in equality.

2. What does “AI in JE mean”?

Proposals to use AI in JE may include:

• Using machine learning algorithms to assign bandings based on job descriptions.
• Automating the matching of roles to national profiles.
• Replacing panel judgement with AI scoring engines.

While digital tools, including Artificial Intelligence (AI) are increasingly being introduced into the workplace, their role in job evaluation must remain strictly limited. The RCN does not accept the use of AI in any scoring, banding or decision-making within job evaluation.

We recognise that AI may play a minor, supportive role in administrative tasks such as checking spelling, grammar and formatting, and document management. But this must not interfere with the integrity of the process.

3. Why we say no: Risks and Concerns

3.1 Undermines fairness and equality

AI systems are trained on historical data and risk replicating and amplifying existing inequalities, including past under banding in job evaluation outcomes. They are unable to capture the nuance required to assess complex nursing roles, such as clinical judgement, professional accountability, emotional labour, and leadership. AI also lacks the lived workplace insight that staff side panellists bring to job evaluation discussions.

3.2 Erodes transparency

AI decision making is often opaque, with little clarity about how outcomes are produced. This undermines the core principle that staff must be able to understand, question, and challenge job evaluation decisions. Machine-generated outputs make meaningful scrutiny and accountability difficult.

3.3 Weakens workforce voice and partnership working

Job evaluation is built on social partnership between employers and trade unions. Introducing AI into the process risks removing democratic participation, marginalising trained panellists, and weakening workforce voice in pay determination.

3.4 Over-simplifies complex roles

NHS roles are diverse and continually evolving, with significant variation even within the same band. Job evaluation depends on professional judgement and contextual discussion, which cannot be replaced by automated pattern matching or standardised algorithms.

3.5 Legal risk

Using AI in job evaluation may compromise compliance with equal pay legislation, particularly where decisions are not transparent or fully explainable. Employers may face legal challenge if AI influences outcomes without auditability, accountability, or collective agreement.

The integrity of the NHS JES depends on partnership working, and the workforce voice. These are not optional; they are fundamental to fair pay and recognition in the NHS.

Checklist for reps and officers:

• Ask your organisation to disclose any current or planned use of AI or digital tools in job evaluation.
• Ask your organisation to disclose any current or planned use of AI or digital tools that may indirectly affect JE e.g. performance management systems.
• Ask whether there are any plans to introduce or procure any new software which would enable AI or digital applications to job evaluation.
• Request a written statement from employer side confirming that no AI is being used to assign scores or bands and that no such plans will proceed without consultation and union agreement.