For all the excitement surrounding artificial intelligence—be it the streamlining, the scaling, the automation of everything from expense reports to entire supply chains—there’s a harsher truth that too many companies are sidestepping. AI is eliminating jobs. Not theoretically. Not someday. Now.
The euphemisms such as “reallocation,” “upskilling” and “workforce optimization” have served us well in softening headlines about job losses to AI. But as someone embedded in the HR ecosystem, speaking with executives, employees and AI providers daily, I’m here to tell you that displacement is not a side effect. For many AI initiatives, it’s the point.
Job losses to AI: the numbers behind the narrative
Let’s start with what we know.
The World Economic Forum’s most recent Future of Jobs report forecasts that 83 million jobs globally will be eliminated by 2027, while 69 million new roles will emerge, for a net loss of 14 million jobs. McKinsey projects that by 2030, up to 30% of hours worked across the U.S. economy could be automated. And in its latest report, Goldman Sachs estimated AI could expose 300 million full-time jobs globally to automation.
In a recent interview, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei openly expressed concerns that AI could eliminate half of all white-collar entry-level jobs within the next one to five years, causing unemployment to spike between 10%-20%. Insofar as worker awareness, the maker of Claude shared that, “Most of them are unaware that this is about to happen.” Amodei added, “We, as the producers of this technology, have a duty and an obligation to be honest about what is coming,”
To be clear, these aren’t jobs lost to offshoring or economic downturn. These are roles rendered obsolete by the generative AI, machine learning and intelligent automation tooling that can now outperform humans in speed, accuracy and scalability, often for pennies on the dollar.
Finance teams are replacing analysts with AI forecasting tools. Marketing departments are shrinking as content engines generate campaigns in seconds. Customer support tiers are being collapsed into large language models that don’t sleep, unionize or request PTO.
This is not science fiction. Job losses to AI are happening in the C-suites and shared services hubs of nearly every large enterprise. Quietly. Strategically. And for many, at the expense of the values and missions we espouse every day.
The false promise of reskilling
One of the most persistent refrains I hear from the industry at large is, “We’re not eliminating jobs; we’re reskilling our people.” While well-intentioned, this is often more slogan than strategy.
Yes, reskilling is a critical investment, but it is not a panacea. Transforming a payroll administrator into an AI prompt engineer isn’t just a matter of will. It requires aptitude, infrastructure, intentionality and the sustained support that many organizations simply don’t provide.
Reskilling also presumes that displaced employees want to stay in the same company or function. Many don’t, and others are demoralized by being asked to do more with less, all under the shadow of systems that quietly replaced their colleagues.
What’s more, the velocity of change driven by AI is outpacing the speed at which organizations can realistically retrain their workforce. There is a fundamental mismatch between the disruption and our response to it.
The HR paradox: architects and casualties
Ironically, HR itself is both a steward and a casualty of this shift.
On one hand, HR leaders are being asked to champion AI adoption across talent acquisition, learning, performance management, workforce planning and virtually every other facet of the hire-to-retire workflow. AI-enabled systems now screen resumes, analyze engagement and even recommend terminations based on productivity data.
On the other hand, HR functions are being downsized as these very systems automate and consolidate core processes. The same transformation leaders who helped select an AI provider may find their roles made redundant by its success.
This duality is deeply uncomfortable, and it requires a reckoning. If HR is to be the conscience of the enterprise, we cannot remain silent about the structural implications of our own enablement and innovations.
Winners, losers and the great cultural divide
The companies that win in this new landscape will be those that navigate the human implications of AI with transparency and foresight. Unfortunately, we’re already seeing a widening divide.
Some organizations are handling the transition with integrity by openly acknowledging job impacts, offering generous severance and investing meaningfully in career transition services. Others are treating AI as a stealth downsizing strategy, using it to quietly eliminate layers of labor without a hint of disclosure or discussion.
We must ask ourselves, what is the cost of that opacity? When trust erodes, culture suffers. And when culture suffers, so does innovation. You cannot simply automate your way out of a broken relationship with your workforce.
We must also acknowledge that there is a growing social disparity in who is impacted. Roles most susceptible to automation, such as administrative, operational and clerical, are disproportionately held by underrepresented and economically vulnerable populations. If AI deployment isn’t accompanied by inclusive workforce planning, we risk deepening existing inequities under the guise of technological progress.
