GoKawiilA recent Mercer survey of nearly 12,000 C-suite executives, HR leaders, investors, and employees found that 99% of CEOs expect AI and automation to drive at least some headcount reduction in the next two years. At the same time, the report found that only 32% of executives believe their organizations are effective at combining human labor with AI systems.
These somewhat contradictory stats form the basis of an ongoing debate over AI and jobs. The data from Mercer shows that companies are indeed cutting or expect to cut significant portions of their workforce. In fact, we recently reported that 40,000 tech industry employees lost their jobs in Q1, 2026.
Now, companies are under pressure to show that these job cuts and billions of dollars in AI spending can translate into measurable returns. Workers, meanwhile, are already being affected as employers redesign teams, slow junior hiring, and tie AI to cost-cutting decisions before broader economic data shows a clear wave of AI-driven job replacement.
Latest Videos From Watch full video here:
The evidence so far does not show an outright, simple story in which AI is massively replacing workers across the economy. Nor has it been proven that the actual AI replacements have proven useful. In another twist, it's possible that what OpenAI CEO Sam Altman calls “AI washing” — blaming AI for layoffs that may have happened anyway — is tainting the data.
Maximum pressure at the bottom of the ladder
(Image credit: Anthropic)
While the layoffs create a valid, growing concern about unemployment, the most immediate impact appears to be on who companies are willing or unwilling to hire, and for what roles. Mercer’s report suggests that younger workers are especially exposed, with entry professionals aged 22 to 27 facing the highest perceived risk of disruption. This is because generative AI is strongest at the codifiable, repeatable tasks that often make up entry-level roles through which new workers are traditionally trained and integrated into the system.
A similar 2026 CEO survey by consulting firm Oliver Wyman points in the same direction. The firm found that the share of companies planning to reduce junior roles has jumped from 17% to 43% in a single year, while 33% are shifting their workforce mix toward midlevel roles. This stat presents another concern. Companies removing junior roles may reduce costs in the short term. However, the move may also weaken their own future talent pipeline. A labor market that demands experience while eliminating the jobs that create experience risks imploding.
For now, the full picture remains quite murky, with contradictions in the available data. Oliver Wyman notes that some of the most advanced AI adopters are not abandoning junior hiring entirely. In fact, companies reporting stronger AI returns are somewhat more likely than weaker performers to shift toward junior workers, suggesting that at least some businesses see AI-literate early-career staff as an asset rather than a cost.
... continue reading