Skip to content
You can now search across every topic, entity and event.What's new
AI: Jobs, Power & Money
27JUL

Who actually said the word AI

3 min read
10:02UTC

Monday.com's co-founder denied any AI motive for 630 cuts, Zalando blamed network realignment for 2,100, and a widely relayed German AI tally turned out to be an American one.

EconomicDeveloping
Key takeaway

Employers denied the AI motive this fortnight; the trade press applied the label regardless.

Monday.com cut 630 jobs on Wednesday 22 July, about 20% of its workforce and roughly 350 of them in Israel, booking USD45 million to USD55 million in restructuring charges 1. Co-founder Eran Zinman told staff in writing that the cut "was not made to reduce costs or replace people with AI". The trade press counted it as an AI layoff anyway, including in a running list of 2026 AI layoffs published three days later by the same outlet that carried Zinman's denial.

Zalando is closing its Erfurt logistics centre by the end of September, ending 2,100 jobs, 1,800 of them permanent 2. An arbitration award on 9 July sealed the social plan after management and the works council failed to agree, and the German retailer has provisioned about EUR80 million, EUR30 million of that for the Sozialplan, the negotiated package of severance and transition measures German works councils bargain for. No transfer company has been set up. Zalando's stated reason is network realignment after buying About You, plus a new site at Giessen. A German employer shedding that many jobs had the AI framing available this fortnight and did not reach for it.

One figure we relayed did not survive checking. A cumulative tally of 101,743 AI-attributed job cuts circulated in German-language business press on 21 July and read, at a glance, as a German total. It belongs to Challenger, Gray & Christmas, the American outplacement firm, and counts cumulative United States cuts through June, from the same series that produced 45,849 US cuts in June alone . Every company named behind it is American 3. We are not running it as a German number, and no German equivalent exists.

The direction of attribution has flipped over eight weeks. MIT Sloan's Paul Osterman called AI attribution a cover story for cuts already planned , Microsoft's 4,800 July cuts came with an explicit denial that AI had replaced anyone , and Ford rehired engineers while IBM pledged to triple entry-level hiring after cuts went too far . Employers NOW deny the label. The press applies it for them.

Deep Analysis

In plain English

This story is about getting the previous stories right. Monday.com cut 630 jobs and its co-founder said in writing it had nothing to do with AI. Zalando closed a big German warehouse and the real reason was combining with a company it bought, not AI. And a widely shared number, 101,743, that people thought was a German AI-layoff count, actually comes from an American firm that tracks US layoffs only. None of these three stories were really about AI replacing workers, even though AI got the blame or the credit in each case.

Deep Analysis
Root Causes

MIT Sloan economist Paul Osterman has argued that AI attribution functions as a cover story that can run in either direction depending on the intended audience: a company facing investors may overstate AI's role to signal efficiency gains, while the same company facing employees or unions may understate it to avoid morale damage or legal exposure under works-council consultation rules.

The 101,743 figure's misattribution has a simpler root cause: it is a cumulative running total published by a US outplacement firm, and once translated into German press coverage without that context, a national total read as a nationality label rather than a scope label.

What could happen next?
  • Meaning

    AI attribution in layoff reporting runs in both directions this fortnight: some employers deny a real AI link, others let an unrelated cut be misread as AI-driven.

  • Risk

    Aggregating misattributed national figures like the 101,743 tally into cross-country comparisons will overstate AI's measured role in European job losses specifically.

First Reported In

Update #18 · SAP freezes R&D headcount as others deny AI

SLC CGIL· 27 Jul 2026
Read original
Different Perspectives
European Commission
European Commission
The European Commission's draft Annex III guidelines, closed for comment on 23 July, treat algorithmic scoring in recruitment, pay and termination as high-risk regardless of whether a human signs off, echoing Spain's Audiencia Nacional ruling 101/2026 on concealed scheduling algorithms. Brussels is shifting the fight from counting AI job losses to assigning legal liability for the tools themselves.
Office for National Statistics
Office for National Statistics
The Office for National Statistics recorded UK vacancies rising to 712,000 on 21 July, the first quarterly increase this beat has tracked, with payrolled employment down 85,000 on the year against May's 210,000 fall. The bulletin names no AI cause anywhere, and that is the point: nothing in the release confirms the displacement story it gets cited to support.
Christian Klein, SAP
Christian Klein, SAP
Christian Klein told investors on 23 July that SAP's research headcount will not grow for twelve months because AI agents and their token costs are absorbing the work, not because SAP is cutting jobs. He frames it as commercial arithmetic: the cost of AI-assisted coding tokens plus the salaries specialist AI hires command, not people being replaced by machines.
Betsey Stevenson, University of Michigan
Betsey Stevenson, University of Michigan
Betsey Stevenson argued that the 187,000 jobless-claims reading describes a market that hires little and fires little, not one AI is emptying. She said the real damage hides in eligibility rules and suppressed job postings, not in the headline layoff counts employers keep denying.
Comisiones Obreras, UGT and Concentrix's A Coruña works committee
Comisiones Obreras, UGT and Concentrix's A Coruña works committee
Comisiones Obreras, UGT and Concentrix's A Coruña works committee blamed Microsoft's push toward AI self-service for the 80 redundancies unions signed off on 22 July, not unavoidable business cause. A second Coruña procedure covering 80 more jobs runs to a 31 August deadline, and the unions want the state, not the employer, setting the pace of AI-driven cuts.
Stanford's 'We Must Act Now' signatories
Stanford's 'We Must Act Now' signatories
More than 200 academics, including 16 Nobel laureates, published a 13 July letter warning of AI-driven labour disruption, citing Daron Acemoglu's NBER estimate that AI's total factor productivity gain stays under 0.66% over ten years. The letter's own cited economics sit well below Goldman Sachs Research's 1.5-percentage-point estimate published the same week.