March 19, 2026
FCC’s Proposal for US-Only Call Centre Staff Could Have a Bot-Sized Hole
The US Federal Communications Commission (FCC) has proposed that customer service agents be based in the United States. The move could end up accelerating the very problem it seeks to solve, according to AnswerConnect.
The telephone answering service provider has warned that, rather than bringing jobs back to American workers, the rules are likely to push businesses towards AI-powered customer service at scale. It has submitted formal comments to the FCC urging regulators for stronger safeguards against AI replacing human contact centre agents.
FCC Proposal Could Backfire
The FCC’s proposal rests on the belief that Americans receive better support when the person picking up the phone is in the same country. AnswerConnect says that while it shares the goal of better customer service, the proposal will “inadvertently” achieve the opposite. Its concern is that the legislation discourages offshore agents without doing anything to incentivise hiring US-based human staff in their place.
AnswerConnect does not spell out the reason why the proposal will “likely lead most businesses to automate customer service”, though cost is the likely explanation. US wages for customer service roles may already make domestic hiring unattractive to many businesses, and the proposal removes the lower-cost offshore alternative without replacing it. For many organisations, the more economical path could simply be automation.
That financial logic is gaining institutional backing. In January, research and advisory firm Gartner predicted that AI customer service costs would soon exceed those of offshore human agents. That suggests automation is already narrowing whatever cost advantage remains. With the FCC proposal removing offshoring from the equation entirely, the pressure towards AI only intensifies.
The proposal does include a requirement for businesses to disclose when callers are speaking to AI and to offer the option of requesting a human. AnswerConnect, however, argues this falls short. In comments submitted to the FCC, it stated: “Instead of bringing more jobs to American workers, businesses are likely, in most cases, to replace people in customer service roles with bots. The key gap is that the law enables calls to be handled by AI as the default.”
AnswerConnect also highlights that many callers will not even know the option to ask for a human agent exists, or will give up before they are informed of it. In fact, its research found that one in three people simply hang up rather than continue interacting with an AI agent.
AnswerConnect Calls for New Legislation
As well as pointing out the risks, AnswerConnect is calling on the FCC to take a more proactive approach. It wants rules that protect human roles rather than replace them, that treat AI as the exception rather than the default, and that offer businesses a financial reason to keep people at the centre of their customer service operations.
AnswerConnect has also raised security concerns. The proposal requires sensitive transactions, such as password resets or the sharing of financial information, to take place at US-based call centres. If these businesses choose to implement AI systems, the risk does not disappear, “it just moves”. Its research found that 67 per cent of consumers do not want AI to have access to their personal information at all.
Although businesses may be looking to save on service costs, AnswerConnect cites research by OnePoll, which shows that customers experience is still very much on the side of human agents. The study of 6,000 people found that 83 per cent of consumers prefer speaking to a real person when contacting a business. Among callers in fields where the stakes are highest, including legal, healthcare, and skilled trades, that preference climbs to nearly 90 per cent.
A Canary in the Contact Centre
The FCC episode reflects a pressure that extends well beyond the contact centre. Mustafa Suleyman, CEO of Microsoft AI, has predicted that all white-collar work could be automated within the next year and a half. Last month, the World Economic Forum cautioned workers against the impacts of AI on their roles. Customer service sits in a particularly exposed position. The work is repetitive enough for AI to handle at scale, and cost pressures favour automation. Consumer preferences still tilt strongly towards human interaction, but that may not be a sufficient brake on its own.
AnswerConnect’s position is unambiguous: “the answer isn’t more bots. It’s more people.” The problem is as long as choosing people costs more, many businesses will push back against any rules to the contrary and look for ways and other loopholes to circumvent them. Whether legislation can ever fully close that gap may be one of the defining questions of the years ahead.
