Finder head of consumer research Graham Cooke said: “For millions of workers, AI feels like a very real threat to their pay packet and their financial security.”

“Workers who keep upskilling and adapting will be far harder to replace. Over the next few years, those who use AI to make themselves more efficient are less likely to have their jobs cut because of AI.”

Although the research found that one in five workers (20 per cent) believed their job is safe from the threat of AI, they said that they think organisations will employ fewer people in their roles in the future.

The research found that 50 per cent of employed Australians reported not being worried about AI taking their job. Cooke warned about complacency about the threat of AI on the job market.

“The risk isn’t just about robots taking over jobs, it’s about roles quietly shrinking, hours being cut, and fewer opportunities coming through the door,” he said.

“The best defence is preparation – build a three- to six-month emergency savings fund, consider income protection, and future-proof your skills now so you’re not scrambling if the AI axe does fall.”

Despite this, the chief scientist at the AI Institute of UNSW, Toby Walsh (pictured), told HR Leader that jobs requiring emotional intelligence, social intelligence, creativity, adaptability, and communication skills are at the lowest risk of AI.

However, Walsh pointed to evidence of the impacts AI will have on entry-level jobs. “The sorts of things that AI can do today are exactly the sorts of things that entry-level people do …. There have been some worrying numbers in terms of employment – tech companies not taking on graduate-level employees this year [and] lots of people in those positions being made redundant,” he said.

Atlassian announced 1,600 layoffs early this year, and 209 jobs are set to be lost after Telstra entered an AI venture with Accenture around the start of the year. Job cuts due to AI have not just affected tech companies but also others, including financial institutions such as Bendigo Bank, as reported by HR Leader in April.

Walsh noted that in the face of these layoffs, some companies have engaged in “AI washing”, in circumstances where it is not clear that AI was actually responsible for job cuts.

“[For these] companies that are perhaps over-hired or are underperforming, the chief executive says ‘it’s because of AI that we’re laying off these people’,” he said.

He said these companies blame AI for job losses, causing their shares to surge because the markets believe they are doing well.

The most important thing is that for high-stakes decisions, humans must always be left in the loop, Walsh emphasised.

“[For] high-stakes decisions like hiring and firing people, ultimately, only humans can be held responsible. You can use AI tools to help you scan through its CVs and so on, but ultimately, it has to be a human who makes that decision,” he said.

“When [organisations] introduce AI, we should celebrate the fact because those were dull, repetitive things that humans should never have done.”

“We should be thankful that machines can now do that stuff and humans can focus on things that …. the machines may never be good at …. [That is] going to be [most] the important [thing] for humans.”

This story was originally published by Cyber Daily’s sister brand, HR Leader.