Contrary to the popular narrative, AI is not yet a primary driver of white-collar layoffs. Instead of eliminating roles, it's changing the nature of work within them. For example, analysts now spend time on different, higher-value activities rather than manual tasks, suggesting a shift in job content rather than a reduction in headcount.
The immediate threat of AI isn't mass layoffs, but rather its impact on future hiring. During the next economic upswing, companies may opt to invest in AI-driven restructuring and reorganization instead of rehiring laid-off white-collar professionals, permanently reducing job opportunities.
The common fear of AI eliminating jobs is misguided. In practice, AI automates specific, often administrative, tasks within a role. This allows human workers to offload minutiae and focus on uniquely human skills like relationship building and strategic thinking, ultimately increasing their leverage and value.
Jensen Huang uses radiology as an example: AI automated the *task* of reading scans, but this freed up radiologists to focus on their *purpose*: diagnosing disease. This increased productivity and demand, ultimately leading to more jobs, not fewer.
While high-profile layoffs make headlines, the more widespread effect of AI is that companies are maintaining or reducing headcount through attrition rather than active firing. They are leveraging AI to grow their business without expanding their workforce, creating a challenging hiring environment for new entrants.
While companies cite AI when announcing layoffs, the data shows cuts are concentrated in industries that over-hired post-pandemic. Job losses in sectors like tech and professional services represent a "reversion to the mean" trendline, countering the narrative that AI is already replacing workers at scale.
AI will make the production of investment memos and rote analysis functionally free. The role of an investment analyst will therefore evolve from creating this content to prompting, steering, and quality-assuring the output of AI agents. The job becomes about evaluation and verification, not initial generation.
Instead of immediate, widespread job cuts, the initial effect of AI on employment is a reduction in hiring for roles like entry-level software engineers. Companies realize AI tools boost existing staff productivity, thus slowing the need for new hires, which acts as a leading indicator of labor shifts.
AI will handle most routine tasks, reducing the number of average 'doers'. Those remaining will be either the absolute best in their craft or individuals leveraging AI for superhuman productivity. Everyone else must shift to 'director' roles, focusing on strategy, orchestration, and interpreting AI output.
Dan Siroker predicts AI will handle the tedious 50% of knowledge work, not eliminate jobs entirely. This allows humans to focus on tasks that provide purpose, passion, and energy. The goal is augmentation, freeing people from drudgery to focus on high-impact, meaningful work.
The immediate threat of AI is to entry-level white-collar jobs, not senior roles. Senior staff can now use AI to perform the "grunt work" of research and drafting previously assigned to apprentices. This automates the traditional career ladder, making it harder for new talent to enter professions like law, finance, and consulting.