For White-Collar Workers, AI Also Stands for “Apocalyptic Insecurity”

Lazonick calls this short-sighted and backward. By getting rid of employees who possess institutional memory, judgment, and hard-won skills, companies are discarding the very knowledge that actually makes innovation work. “For creativity and innovation to happen, you need a workforce that is equipped, engaged and truly involved in the future,” he says. Robots cannot provide that spark.

Diana Enriquez, a sociologist who studies large-scale automation, warns against companies following a “technology playbook” that pressures workers to trust technology, even when the algorithm is wrong. Middle managers are forced to claim successes that the system has not actually delivered. For what? Because the mindset of tech company executives, Enriquez says, sees “workers as a problem that needs to be solved.”

In offices, the impact is obvious. An AI bot manages Jade’s meeting minutes — and half the time, they don’t even make sense. “You end up spending more time fixing them: someone could have done it better and faster.” In this example, AI becomes the problem to solve. Some, like Joanna Popper, CEO of AI film and content company Laurel Beach, see split-screen for workers. On the one hand, she finds opportunities. On the other hand, these opportunities are not distributed equally. “AI tools can act as a lever, allowing creators to act more quickly and at lower cost, which could help those who are historically marginalized,” says Popper. “But it also reduces the number of workers needed.”