One of the world’s biggest banks by assets is making headlines this week, but not in a good way. Australia’s Commonwealth Bank (CBA) was forced to reverse its decision to make 45 staff members redundant due to new artificial intelligence (AI) technology.

The bank hired a new AI-driven “voice bot” to handle customer phone calls, but the technology was not as effective as originally thought. Despite the bank’s claims that it was cutting 2,000 calls a week, allowing it to shed staff, the workers’ unionized to claimed the exact opposite was true. Management actually moved staff around in order to meet growing customer demand, leading the Fair Work Tribunal to find that the staff had not been made redundant.

At the center of the story are some long-serving members of the CBA. When workers were suddenly informed their jobs were no longer needed, some of the employees had worked at the bank for as long as three decades. In its defense, the bank claimed that a previous change in call handling software had created more customer calls, which the new bot was helping to solve.

The bank’s original argument was not enough to appease the Finance Sector Union (FSU), which took the case to a tribunal, arguing that the bank had misled workers about the reasons for the redundancies. Part of its claim was that the bank was also hiring in India around the same time, and its reasoning for the layoffs was a smokescreen to cover that up.

The bank quickly backpedaled in a hearing. CBA representatives informed the tribunal that call numbers had actually increased during the period in question. The representative went on to inform the tribunal that CBA “had made an error” that “meant the roles were not redundant,” according to a Bloomberg report.

The outcome is that the CBA has apologized and reversed the redundancies. A CBA spokesperson told Bloomberg, “We have apologized to the employees concerned and acknowledge we should have been more thorough in our assessment of the roles required.”

Employees now have the option to return to their old jobs or look for new roles internally. Those who choose not to return to work for the CBA will still be paid a redundancy package.

This reversal has been hailed as a “massive win” for the union, but there is still serious fallout over the decision. The FSU has pointed out that the bot could still see staff jobs disappear in the future, and some staff could have been left behind if they were unable to work while their future was up in the air. The union has said that the bank was “expected to act responsibly” and that many of the employees could have gone without pay for some time.

The bank’s adoption of AI is not slowing down. CBA announced a new partnership with OpenAI last week, planning to build advanced generative AI tools to improve services to customers, fight fraud and scams, and further integrate the technology across its operations. The partnership is still in its early stages, with CBA assuring staff it was a move to “invest in” and not “replace” its workforce.

The CBA is just one of the banks around the world expected to lose large numbers of jobs to AI, according to estimates. Banks could lose up to 200,000 jobs to automation in three to five years, according to an analysis from Bloomberg Intelligence. “We’re expecting to see banks increasing their use of tech to create efficiencies by automating their back office, middle office, and operations functions,” the report reads.

The CBA case, however, is a strong reminder for banks everywhere. The damage to employee and consumer trust from making and then reversing a potentially poorly informed decision is likely to be long-lasting, whatever the speed of the push to automation and AI.