A practical test by fiduciary Simon Lei reveals significant weaknesses.
Artificial intelligence can be extremely helpful in everyday life – but when it comes to Swiss employment law, things get tricky. A current test with ten real questions from practice, compiled by fiduciary Simon Lei, shows a clear picture:
➡️ ChatGPT hallucinates or provides incorrect or incomplete answers in 9 out of 10 cases.
➡️ The AI invents legal articles, mixes up OR and ArG, or misinterprets deadlines.
➡️ In some cases, ChatGPT only corrects itself when questioned – or sticks with incorrect assumptions.
The problem: ChatGPT has no current Swiss laws, no certified legal sources, and no weekly professional review processes. The model "guesses" answers statistically – and this systematically leads to errors in employment law.
For HR, fiduciaries, SMEs, or employees, this can lead to serious wrong decisions: Incorrectly calculated blocking periods, incorrect vacation reductions, faulty continued salary payment claims, or misleading statements about probationary periods are not simply misunderstandings, but can have real legal and financial consequences.
In other words:
❌ ChatGPT often provides convincingly worded but legally incorrect information.
✔️ For Swiss employment law, verified, correctly validated answers are needed.
This was precisely the goal of the test: to demonstrate how important reliable, legally validated information is in employment law – especially in an environment where many people use AI without knowing its limitations.
References to the identified problems
Vacation reduction during illness – ChatGPT invented different waiting periods depending on years of service.
Continued salary payment – incorrect interpretation of the Basel/Bern/Zurich scales.
Probationary period – mixing of OR and Vocational Training Act, incorrect statements about minimum duration.
Notice periods – incorrect rules regarding termination dates and month-ends.
Vacation entitlement – incorrect references to OR articles and mixing of law and "practical standards".
Termination during illness – partially incorrect interpretation of blocking periods.
Overtime/excess hours – mixing of OR and ArG, imprecise or incorrect statements.
Employment reference – false claim about non-existent OR articles.
Salary payment dates – unclear, partly contradictory statements about due dates.
Salary reduction during illness – incorrect information about the effect of daily sickness allowance insurance.
