Regardless of breathless headlines warning of a robotic takeover within the workforce, a brand new analysis briefing from Oxford Economics casts doubt on the narrative that synthetic intelligence is at the moment inflicting mass unemployment. In keeping with the agency’s evaluation, “corporations don’t seem like changing employees with AI on a big scale,” suggesting as an alternative that firms could also be utilizing the expertise as a canopy for routine headcount reductions.
In a January 7 report, the analysis agency argued that, whereas anecdotal proof of job displacement exists, the macroeconomic information doesn’t assist the concept of a structural shift in employment attributable to automation. As an alternative, it factors to a extra cynical company technique: “We suspect some corporations try to decorate up layoffs as a excellent news story fairly than dangerous information, similar to previous over-hiring.”
Spinning the narrative
The first motivation for this rebranding of job cuts seems to be investor relations. The report notes that attributing workers reductions to AI adoption “conveys a extra constructive message to buyers” than admitting to conventional enterprise failures, similar to weak client demand or “extreme hiring previously.” By framing layoffs as a technological pivot, firms can current themselves as forward-thinking innovators fairly than companies scuffling with cyclical downturns.
In a latest interview, Wharton administration professor Peter Cappelli informed Fortune that he’s seen analysis about how, as a result of markets usually rejoice information of job cuts, corporations announce “phantom layoffs” that by no means truly happen. Firms have been arbitraging the constructive stock-market response to the information of a possible layoff, however “a number of a long time in the past, the market stopped going up as a result of [investors] began to understand that firms weren’t truly even doing the layoffs that they stated they have been going to do.”
When requested concerning the supposed hyperlink between AI and layoffs, Cappelli urged individuals to look intently at bulletins. “The headline is, ‘It’s due to AI,’ however should you learn what they really say, they are saying, ‘We count on that AI will cowl this work.’ Hadn’t carried out it. They’re simply hoping. They usually’re saying it as a result of that’s what they suppose buyers wish to hear.”
Knowledge behind the hype
The Oxford report highlighted information from Challenger, Grey & Christmas, the recruiting agency that is among the main suppliers of layoff information, for instance the disparity between notion and actuality. Whereas AI was cited as the explanation for almost 55,000 U.S. job cuts within the first 11 months of 2025—accounting for over 75% of all AI-related cuts reported since 2023—this determine represents a mere 4.5% of whole reported job losses.
By comparability, job losses attributed to plain “market and financial circumstances” have been 4 instances bigger, totaling 245,000. When seen in opposition to the broader backdrop of the U.S. labor market, the place 1.5 million to 1.8 million employees lose their jobs in any given month, “AI-related job losses are nonetheless comparatively restricted.”
The productiveness puzzle
Oxford posits a easy financial litmus take a look at for the AI revolution: if machines have been really changing people at scale, output per remaining employee ought to skyrocket. “If AI have been already changing labour at scale, productiveness development must be accelerating. Usually, it isn’t.”
The report observes that latest productiveness development has truly decelerated, a pattern that aligns with cyclical financial behaviors fairly than an AI-driven growth. Whereas the agency acknowledges that productiveness positive factors from new applied sciences typically take years to materialize, the present information means that AI use stays “experimental in nature and isn’t but changing employees on a serious scale.”
On the similar time, latest information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics confirms that the “low-hire, low-fire” labor market is morphing right into a “jobless growth,” KPMG chief economist Diane Swonk beforehand informed Fortune‘s Eva Roytburg.
This tallies with what Financial institution of America Analysis’s Head of US Fairness & Quantitative Technique, Savita Subramanian, informed Fortune in August about how firms have discovered within the 2020s to typically substitute individuals with course of. On the similar time, she agreed that productiveness measures “haven’t actually improved all that a lot since 2001,” recalling the well-known “productiveness paradox” recognized by Nobel prize-winning economist Robert Solow: “You may see the pc age in all places however within the productiveness statistics.”
The briefing additionally addresses fears that AI is eroding entry-level white-collar jobs. Whereas U.S. graduate unemployment rose to a peak of 5.5% in March 2025, Oxford Economics argued that is doubtless “cyclical fairly than structural,” pointing to a “provide glut” of degree-holders as a extra possible wrongdoer. The share of 22-to-27-year-olds with college training within the U.S. rose to 35% by 2019, with even sharper will increase noticed within the Eurozone.
In the end, Oxford Economics concludes that shifts within the labor market are more likely to be “evolutionary fairly than revolutionary.”
