A survey of 1,000 hiring managers found that 59% say they emphasize AI’s role in layoffs because it is viewed more favorably than saying layoffs or hiring freezes
A lot of people have suspected this is the case for the last couple years. Indeed is has to be the case because the tech just isn't good enough yet to replace even a small fraction of the jobs...
A lot of people have suspected this is the case for the last couple years. Indeed is has to be the case because the tech just isn't good enough yet to replace even a small fraction of the jobs that companies have claimed for PR purposes.
Only 9% said AI had fully replaced any roles.
[...]
The AI premium isn’t even reliable. By late 2025, Goldman Sachs group Inc. found that investors were actually punishing AI-attributed layoffs, with shares falling an average of 2%. The analysts concluded that investors simply didn’t believe the companies. But Block’s surge shows the incentive hasn’t vanished. It’s just a lottery instead of a sure thing. And executives keep buying tickets.
The broader data confirms the gap between narrative and reality. A National Bureau of Economic Research study published in February surveyed thousands of C-suite executives across the US, UK, Germany and Australia. Almost 90% said AI had zero impact on employment over the past three years. Challenger, Gray & Christmas tracked 1.2 million layoffs in 2025, and AI was cited in fewer than 55,000 of them. That’s 4.5%. Plain old “market and economic conditions” accounted for four times as many.
However...
There are early signs that real displacement has begun. Stanford University economics professor Erik Brynjolfsson has documented a 13% relative decline in employment for early-career workers in AI-exposed jobs. The effects may be arriving, but the gap between that finding and what is being claimed is enormous.
Emphasis on may. There's little doubt AI will effect jobs, but how much of an effect, and when it will happen, is still undetermined. In the meantime, and as always, don't pay attention to corporate PR.
Wouldn't that also fall under "plain ol' economic conditions"? In a recession, the most junior positions get cut or frozen first. Also, never discount outsourcing where applicable. There's a...
Stanford University economics professor Erik Brynjolfsson has documented a 13% relative decline in employment for early-career workers in AI-exposed jobs.
Wouldn't that also fall under "plain ol' economic conditions"? In a recession, the most junior positions get cut or frozen first.
Also, never discount outsourcing where applicable. There's a constant narrative of "tech companies overhired over the pandemic". But note that, despite these layoffs, overall employee counts barely budged. They may have even increased. In addition, more and more H1-B visas are approaved year by year despite there being more domestic talent available than ever.
Outsourcing / offshoring is a massive problem in the tech space that gets almost zero attention from the news media or politicians. It's almost always done for cost (at least as the primary...
Outsourcing / offshoring is a massive problem in the tech space that gets almost zero attention from the news media or politicians. It's almost always done for cost (at least as the primary motivator) not for the labor pool or skillsets available. At least in software engineering.
If you trust HR-targeted news sources, it seems people are being laid off due to AI-based automation, but it's not going well. This farce just confirms my personal conviction that upper managers...
If you trust HR-targeted news sources, it seems people are being laid off due to AI-based automation, but it's not going well.
This farce just confirms my personal conviction that upper managers have no idea what their subordinates actually do for the company, and think of us as replaceable cogs in the machine until things break when we're gone. Human "resources", my ass.
Yep. Layoffs are just a "make cost line go down" lever that they pull, unaware that it also leads to revenue going down sooner or later. Then they decide layoffs are the way to fix that again,...
Yep. Layoffs are just a "make cost line go down" lever that they pull, unaware that it also leads to revenue going down sooner or later. Then they decide layoffs are the way to fix that again, then they just blame "economic challenges" as the company deteriorates. Then another company buys their failing competitor and does more layoffs, because the consolidation reduces needed jobs.
As it turns out, competition isn't just essential for a healthy market on the customer side, it also means more jobs. So if you want to improve the economy, break up companies.
A lot of people have suspected this is the case for the last couple years. Indeed is has to be the case because the tech just isn't good enough yet to replace even a small fraction of the jobs that companies have claimed for PR purposes.
[...]
However...
Emphasis on may. There's little doubt AI will effect jobs, but how much of an effect, and when it will happen, is still undetermined. In the meantime, and as always, don't pay attention to corporate PR.
Wouldn't that also fall under "plain ol' economic conditions"? In a recession, the most junior positions get cut or frozen first.
Also, never discount outsourcing where applicable. There's a constant narrative of "tech companies overhired over the pandemic". But note that, despite these layoffs, overall employee counts barely budged. They may have even increased. In addition, more and more H1-B visas are approaved year by year despite there being more domestic talent available than ever.
Outsourcing / offshoring is a massive problem in the tech space that gets almost zero attention from the news media or politicians. It's almost always done for cost (at least as the primary motivator) not for the labor pool or skillsets available. At least in software engineering.
If you trust HR-targeted news sources, it seems people are being laid off due to AI-based automation, but it's not going well.
This farce just confirms my personal conviction that upper managers have no idea what their subordinates actually do for the company, and think of us as replaceable cogs in the machine until things break when we're gone. Human "resources", my ass.
Yep. Layoffs are just a "make cost line go down" lever that they pull, unaware that it also leads to revenue going down sooner or later. Then they decide layoffs are the way to fix that again, then they just blame "economic challenges" as the company deteriorates. Then another company buys their failing competitor and does more layoffs, because the consolidation reduces needed jobs.
As it turns out, competition isn't just essential for a healthy market on the customer side, it also means more jobs. So if you want to improve the economy, break up companies.