When AI isn't about augmenting jobs, but getting rid of them

Let's be honest, many of us are thinking it already. All the global reports by the big players like PwC say AI will be an enabler. But are they just spin? Because on the ground, something different is happening.

I'm going to call out what many quietly suspect: AI isn't just helping us, it's being used to cut labour costs and replace roles. And there are leaders who want exactly that. For productivity!

It's time we had an honest conversation. Not about whether AI is good or bad. But about how it's being used and who it's really serving.

The real focus: trimming the payroll

Organisations are deploying AI primarily as a cost-cutting tool: automating roles, reducing headcount, and replacing people with algorithms. By framing AI this way, the technology becomes a substitute, not a partner. That's a strategic and cultural pivot with serious consequences for organisational trust and employee well-being.

And here's the bigger question: is replacing staff with AI simply a smart business decision or is it unethical? Leaders who treat people as costs to eliminate may see short-term gain, but it comes at a long-term price: loyalty, morale, and brand integrity.

The cost-cutting message shifts workplace culture

When AI is introduced with "firing" headlines, the message is loud and clear: people aren't valued. Trust erodes, engagement drops, and the war for talent gets messier. Leaders who want to bring AI into the fold need to rethink how they talk about it. Is your AI strategy positioned around savings or empowerment?

How your organisation frames AI speaks volumes about its ethical compass. If the focus is on augmentation and human potential, that signals ethical intent. If it's purely about replacement, that sends a very different message.

Ethics at work: Is this fair?

This approach also troubles the waters ethically:

• Human dignity: Are we respecting staff if we reduce them to line-items replaced by machines?

• Bias and inequality: If job cuts aren't managed responsibly, adversity is likely to fall unevenly across demographics.

• Transparency: Were staff told how and why roles were being automated? Or was it hidden behind "server upgrades"?

Those are not just HR issues, they're leadership issues. Intentional leaders understand that bringing tech in must involve clear communication, support, reskilling and, where appropriate, redeployment.

Ethical business isn't just about compliance. It's about treating people fairly even when it's not convenient. And that includes how we use AI.

A leader's choice: augment or replace?

We face a fork in the road:

• Replace-centric AI: Short-term gains, potential long-term reputational loss, increase in insecurity.

• Augment-centric AI: Invest in your people; use AI to empower them; co-create new roles and foster innovation.

Intentional leaders pick the latter, and they define success not just in productivity, but in growth, engagement, and ethical stewardship.

Because ethical leadership isn't just the right thing to do, it's good for business.

What you can do today

• Audit your AI framing: How are you talking about AI in your org? Cost-savings or empowerment?

• Map roles to AI: Which roles are at risk, and what's your plan to reskill affected people?

• Be transparent: Explain how AI will influence workflows. Set expectations early and help people prepare.

• Track impact: Beyond ROI, measure retention, team sentiment, mental wellbeing, and inclusion.

This challenges the dominant narrative, even among tech insiders, by asking us to confront the ethics behind our tech investments. Because at the end of the day, people aren't widgets.

The point isn't "AI or no AI', it's how we choose to use it.

What kind of AI story are you telling in your organisation and is it one that lifts people up or pushes them out?