As artificial intelligence becomes increasingly embedded in the operations of global companies, executives are speaking more openly about its impact. AI is no longer just a tool for productivity; it is also being used as a method for reducing headcount. Elijah Clark, a consultant who helps companies adopt AI, described the shift in direct terms. “I’ve laid off employees myself because of AI,” he said. “I am hired by CEOs to figure out how to use AI to cut jobs. Not in ten years. Right now.”
The rapid adoption of AI is not only changing workflows. It is also reshaping the definition of work itself. Interviews with technologists, researchers, and labor organizers reveal a clear pattern. While corporate leaders see potential in automation, workers affected by it are reporting increased financial stress, a loss of control, and worsening job conditions. These opposing experiences raise a fundamental question within the AI economy. Who benefits, and who pays the price?
In July, researchers and labor advocates expressed growing concern about the expanding role of AI in the workplace. Executives continue to emphasize efficiency and agility. Meanwhile, workers on the ground are watching their roles shift or disappear. For some, this change feels inevitable. For others, it represents a direct challenge to their livelihood and sense of purpose.
Corporate Vision: Efficiency, Experience, and Fewer People
From the viewpoint of top-level executives, AI is accelerating trends that were already underway in business. Elijah Clark explained that AI provides consistency and control in ways that human labor cannot. “AI doesn’t go on strike. It doesn’t ask for a pay raise. These are things you do not have to deal with as a CEO,” he said. In one example, he described replacing almost an entire team of student workers after discovering that AI could complete their tasks much more quickly.
Peter Miscovich, Global Future of Work Leader at real estate and investment firm JLL, described AI as a force that continues to reshape the structure of the workforce. He noted a growing separation between headcount and company growth, with some businesses cutting staff while still expanding. Miscovich predicted that reductions in staffing could reach as much as 40 percent as automation becomes more widespread.
Even with smaller teams, he suggested that physical office spaces are not disappearing. Instead, they are being transformed. He described a future in which “experiential workplaces” are designed to attract employees through high-end amenities and flexible layouts. These updated offices are not intended to be mandatory. They are built to be appealing spaces where people choose to work.
The Workers Behind the Algorithms
While the headlines around AI often focus on technological breakthroughs, much of the labor supporting these systems is still performed by people. Gig workers and contractors handle tasks such as data labeling, content moderation, and system testing. Krystal Kauffman, a researcher and longtime worker on Amazon Mechanical Turk, said she has seen the shift up close. “The work has changed to focus almost entirely on data annotation,” she said. “Human labor is absolutely powering the AI boom.”
Kauffman, who also serves as a research fellow at the Distributed AI Research Institute (DAIR), emphasized that this work is largely invisible, poorly paid, and unprotected. Workers are typically paid per task and may have little information about why their work is accepted or rejected. She also pointed to the emotional burden faced by those who moderate disturbing content, often with no support or protection, in service of training AI models.
Adrienne Williams, another DAIR fellow and a former Amazon delivery driver, described the current AI-driven economy as a new kind of forced labor. She highlighted the subtle ways that everyday users contribute to AI, often without realizing it. This includes their digital interactions, browsing behavior, and engagement metrics. “You’re already training AI,” she said. “If we had any insight into who is taking our data, how it is used, and how much it earns, we would demand some ownership over it.”
Rethinking the Role and Value of Work
As automation continues to expand, some advocates are calling for a new vision of work. This reimagining would prioritize care, dignity, and human connection over cost reduction. Ai-jen Poo, president of the National Domestic Workers Alliance, believes that care work—including support for children, the elderly, and people with disabilities—should not be automated. She argues that technology should be designed to assist these workers, not replace them.
Poo calls for an economic system built around safety and respect. She supports policies that provide healthcare, paid leave, and living wages for all workers, especially those in caregiving roles. “The work of enabling potential and supporting dignity for others is human work,” she said. “Technology should improve the quality of life and work, not remove it.”
For many people in care-based professions, the job is more than a source of income. It is a vocation. Poo noted that home care workers often earn as little as $22,000 a year, yet many stay in the field for decades. “They see it as a calling,” she said. “What they want is for that calling to be recognized and supported with real financial security.”
What Kind of Future Will AI Build?
The direction of AI adoption reflects a deeper conflict. One path focuses on maximizing profits, reducing staff, and widening economic gaps. The other offers a chance to make technology more inclusive and to center the economy on human well-being. Advocates such as Poo and Kauffman believe that the outcome is not yet fixed. The future can still be shaped through public pressure and smart policy.
Williams, reflecting on her experience in both warehouses and schools, warned that unchecked AI development could deepen exploitation. She described the physical toll of warehouse labor and the dehumanizing effects of algorithm-driven learning platforms. These systems often reduce students to performance metrics. “I’ve talked to women who lost their babies because Amazon refused to assign them less physically demanding duties,” she said. “In schools, kids are getting migraines from staring at screens all day.”
The discussion about AI and labor is not only about systems and software. It is also a moral and ethical question. Will society allow automation to define human worth, or will it demand technologies that support and strengthen the people who use them? Clark offered a stark view of his role in the current moment. “The humanness inside of the whole thing is not happening,” he said. His job, as he sees it, is to help companies operate with fewer people.
The challenge ahead is clear. Workers, governments, and communities must insist that the conversation around AI does not stop with efficiency. The more urgent question is whether the future of work will serve the interests of many or only a few. The true value of labor lies not just in productivity, but in the human relationships, dignity, and purpose it brings.