Economist warns companies may lay off workers just to look ahead of the curve
The wave of high-tech layoffs and AI, created with AI, Alex Imas, an economics professor at the University of Chicago and head of AGI economics at Google DeepMind, said in an interview on the Dwarkesh Podcast that there is currently no clear evidence of a broad white-collar jobs bloodbath caused by artificial intelligence. According to him, even in sectors considered especially exposed, such as software engineering, there has still not been mass replacement of workers because of AI.
But his warning comes from a different place. Imas describes a kind of “FOMO layoffs,” a situation in which companies cut jobs not because AI has already actually replaced them, but because they fear being seen as left behind. In other words, even if the technology is not really doing the work in place of employees yet, the pressure to appear more efficient, innovative, and leaner in the eyes of the market could generate a wave of cuts of its own. Looking for a job in high-tech? Hundreds of open positions are waiting for you on the Jobnet website from the Walla group >>
Not AI layoffs, but FOMO layoffs. The scenario Imas describes is troubling precisely because it does not rest only on the capabilities of the technology, but on the behavior of managers. When one company says it is reducing headcount thanks to AI, other companies may feel they have to make a similar move, not necessarily because they already know how to replace workers, but to avoid looking slow, outdated, or less efficient in the eyes of investors, the board, and the market. This is essentially a managerial domino effect, layoffs that begin not from clear proof of higher productivity, but from fear of missing the revolution. Imas warned that such a move could even hurt companies’ own performance if they cut employees before they really know how to use AI in a way that replaces or improves their work.
More on Walla, the guide for high-tech workers laid off: how to preserve the money that belongs to you. To the full article
This point is especially important for workers, the fact that a company explains a cut as a move prompted by developments in AI does not necessarily mean their role has already been replaced by a machine. Sometimes it can be the same familiar language of efficiency, cost cutting, and restructuring, only with a far more convincing technological package.
The desire to be part of the revolution
Imas is not saying AI will not change the labor market. On the contrary, he says artificial intelligence can perform parts of existing jobs, but at the same time it can also raise productivity and allow workers to focus on tasks where humans have a clear advantage. In other words, not every adoption of AI has to end in layoffs, in many cases it can change the role, not erase it.
And still, in a sensitive labor market, the story companies tell around AI can itself become an independent force. Once “efficiency through artificial intelligence” becomes a legitimate explanation for cuts, workers may find themselves facing a reality in which it is not always clear whether they were fired because of technology, investor pressure, overhiring in previous years, or simply because managers wanted to show they were part of the revolution.
For workers, the bottom line is less dramatic but much more practical: not every headline about AI layoffs means machines have already replaced humans. But it does signal that the labor market is entering a new stage, one in which fear of technology can be almost as powerful as the technology itself. Looking for a job? On Jobnet you will find positions across all fields
