AI’s Silent Takeover: Jobs Are Changing, Not Disappearing | Image Source: www.economist.com
CAMBRIDGE, Massachusetts, April 7, 2025 – In the battle between man and machine, it is not the apocalypse robot that we imagine. Rather, it is a silent but profound change, where artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping the labour market, not by creating mass jobs, but by reconfiguring the very definition of labour. According to information obtained from sources such as Fortune, The Economist and PYMNTS, the influence of AI on employment is not direct or universal. It is complex, with layers, and as economist MIT David Author says, a design problem rather than a prognosis.
What started with China’s DeepSeek releasing a budget-friendly LLM model has become an overall reassessment of what the CEW can really do, and what it should afford to do. Beyond energy efficiency and equipment, what is also disputed is the role of the human workforce at a time when machines can write code, interpret X-rays and even simulate therapeutic conversations. As automation becomes more sophisticated, human work does not disappear, it is redefined and, in some cases, even improved.
What types of jobs are safe from AI?
One of the most urgent issues for today’s workers is: What jobs are protected from AI? According to a study conducted by the U.S. Career Institute in February 2023, the work that requires in-person interaction remains among the safest. Nurse practitioners, choreographers, educators and mental health counsellors are considered relatively safe because they rely on human touch, emotional nuance and situational judgment, qualities that machines still find difficult to imitate.
As Carsten Jung, Head of Macroeconomics and AI at the Institute for Public Policy Research, said, “We have passed the valley of incalence” and we are now in an unexplored territory. “He warned that AI was already used in company and therapy, suggesting that even traditionally safe areas could see trouble. However, its key point remains: face-to-face roles that require empathy and physical presence will remain relevant in a machine-led world.
According to this, Jasmine Sayyari, CEO of the New Generation Network, stressed that sectors that require human connections, such as health, education and skilled trades, should move further away in this transition era. His observation is based on real data: more than 150,000 job losses occurred in 525 technology companies in 2024, but the demand for roles involving people-centred skills remained firm.
Will workers replace or improve?
This leads to another critical question: Does IA replace humans or simply change how we work? At the MIT AI conference in March 2025, David Author presented a compelling argument: AI will not make human workers obsolete, it will make them more essential.
“There are two competing visions of AI. One of them is that machines make us useless. Another is that machines make us more useful. I think he has a lot to recommend.”
Over the past two centuries, automation has continuously improved human value. From agriculture to the factory to digital workflows, each technological leap eliminates certain tasks, but also creates new forms of experience. This trend is expected to continue with AI.
Take, for example, CheXpert, an AI model designed to read chest X-rays. Although he can overcome radiologists in identifying patterns, studies have shown that radiologists working with CheXpert have made more mistakes than those working alone. The problem? AI was not designed to teach judgment. This highlights a broader point: tools can amplify human skills, but only if they are used wisely, and this requires human supervision.
What are the most threatened jobs?
Although some jobs are clearly safer, others remain in balance. Which professions are most vulnerable to AI? According to Jung’s analysis, office documents are particularly exposed. Think of personal assistants, coders, data entry staff and marketing professionals, jobs that depend largely on routine tasks and models.
Jung estimated that almost 59% of tasks in the economy as a whole could be “significant” thanks to the current AI technology. He explained: “Two out of three tasks are in danger. But this does not mean that these jobs will disappear at night. Instead, workers can see their role evolve. Coders can become quality assurance analysts. Personal assistants can use workflow coordinators.
The key word here is evolution, not eradication. As ATMs did not destroy the banking sector, but they changed the role of cashier, AI changed the landscape, breaking the old functions as it opened the way for new ones.
What is breaking up the AI workforce?
Why does AI so aggressively interrupt the labour market? One of the main reasons is the increasing adoption of AI-based tools in all industries. Sayyari noted the explosive growth of the global SaaS industry, which increased from $157 million in 2020 to about $250 billion in 2024. It’s not just a technological boom, it’s a sign that companies are integrating AI faster than society can adapt.
From health diagnosis to manufacturing automation, AI is more deeply integrated into our workflows that most realize. Even industries like mining and ocean mining, traditionally resistant to automation, are about to transform. However, as Sayyari says, the transition phase will continue. Departures, healing and psychological adjustment are part of the growing pain.
It divided the AI era into two phases: transition and growth. “We are deeply in the transition,” he said. “If the labour market is well adapted in the first five years, the second phase could bring about technological and social progress. “
Can you keep Pace with the AI?
Are governments and institutions ready for this change? According to Jung, the answer is no. He stressed that, although impact assessment technology is being developed, policies remain blocked in the past. “We must decide what role we want this new kind of intelligence to play in society and put in place policies to achieve it,” he said. ”For the moment, politics is not to follow.”
This gap between technological progress and regulatory oversight is of concern. In the absence of strong labour protection and retraining programs, the benefits of the CEW could be unevenly distributed, thus widening social and economic gaps. Jung and Sayyari call for urgent investment in human capital, particularly in education and vocational training.
What do the workers think?
How do workers react to the AI revolution? A January 2025 PYNTS The intelligence report reveals that 54% of the workers surveyed consider IV a significant risk to job stability. Interestingly, those who perform technological and non-client functions are most interested. Health and education professionals are also relatively more optimistic.
The report also identified generational and socio-economic divisions. Baby Boomers and Gen X are more eager to travel than Gen Z. High incomes with university degrees are also more likely to worry about the impact of AI. This suggests that IA concerns are less about jobs themselves and more about uncertainty – how roles will change, what skills will be needed and how quickly people can adapt.
What awaits us?
As the author said, “the future is not a prognosis problem. It’s a design problem.” The real challenge is not whether AI will take a job, but how we, as a society, have decided to integrate it into our lives. Will we develop tools that complement or replace human capabilities?
There are reasons to hope. History shows that technological advances often create more jobs to destroy. Stethoscope didn’t eliminate the doctors, but made them better. The pneumatic hammer did not put the weavers to work – it helped them to do their job faster. Similarly, AI can reduce the distance between human intent and significant results.
Ultimately, the question is not whether AI will transform the work. This is how we are prepared to adapt, train and redefine what a meaningful job is in a world where the lines between man and machine remain blurred.
