As Amazon carries out the largest round of layoffs in its history, attention is turning to the background. The company announced it would cut about 14,000 from its total workforce, stating its intention to "move nimbly like the world's biggest Start - Up." But controversy follows over whether the move is truly a strategy to prepare for the age of artificial intelligence (AI) or a bid to improve short-term results.
According to CNN on the 28th (local time), Amazon posted $35 billion (about 49 trillion won) in net profit in the first half of this year alone and plans to invest more than $120 billion (about 168 trillion won) in AI this year. Nevertheless, the decision to conduct large-scale layoffs reflects CEO Andy Jassy's judgment to "boost efficiency and slim down the organization during the AI transition." Jassy said, "Cutting headcount is key to leading in the AI era," adding, "The world is changing fast, and Amazon must reshape its structure to match that change."
However, an Amazon Spokesperson drew a line, saying, "This workforce reduction is not due to AI advances." In fact, the layoffs were not limited to specific divisions or technical roles and reportedly occurred across the company. Experts analyzed that the move is closer to pricing in expectations that AI will improve productivity in the future rather than replacing workers with AI now.
Sam Landsbottom, a professor at Boston College in the United States, said, "Expectations are high that AI technology will improve corporate efficiency, but there are not many verified cases of its actual effect," and evaluated the restructuring as "a gamble betting on AI's potential."
Not only Amazon but major U.S. corporations are showing a similar trend. UPS cut 48,000 jobs this year, and Target, Microsoft and Meta also reduced headcount by the thousands. CNN described this as "a race among corporations to cut labor costs under the pretext of the AI era."
Management experts see complex factors such as economic uncertainty and trade conflicts, rather than AI technology, behind the situation. Professor Landsbottom said, "AI can also serve as a 'convenient pretext' that masks the difficulties corporations face."
Meanwhile, mentions of AI have surged in recent corporate job postings, but many cases remain unclear on how it actually applies to the work, critics said. According to a report released by the job site Indeed, more than a quarter of job postings containing AI-related wording turned out to be "exaggerated promotion without a specific role description."
Jessica Kriegel, chief strategy officer (CSO) at consulting firm Culture Partners, said, "At present, only a very small number of corporations are replacing people with AI," and pointed out that "most layoffs are being carried out preemptively in the name of preparing for the future, not due to actual technological change."
Kriegel said, "AI technology has not yet reached the level to replace most human tasks," and explained, "The layoffs happening now are less about improving efficiency and more akin to management moving to secure financial breathing room."
The limits of AI technology also show up in productivity data. Adoption of Generative AI is rising quickly, but it has not translated into productivity gains across the broader economy. Some outputs produced by AI chatbots may look like useful work products, such as reports or documents, on the surface, but critics note that the content is often inaccurate and fails to create real value.
There are also warnings that Amazon's decision may lift the stock price in the short term but weaken corporate competitiveness in the long term. Kriegel said, "Too-rapid layoffs don't make a company nimble; they make it vulnerable," adding, "The winners of the AI transition will not be the companies that push automation the fastest, but the ones that maintain adaptability even in a crisis."