Is AI really stealing your job? New Yale study fact-checks claims and finds out the culprits

Metaverse

Is AI really stealing your job? New Yale study fact-checks claims and finds out the culprits – Crypto News

Published

4 days ago

October 6, 2025

Dripp

AI job loss update: For over two years, artificial intelligence has been blamed for triggering jobs across sectors globally, especially the tech industry. From boardrooms to earning calls, AI replacing tech jobs is the new hot topic of discussion, with many US CEOs warning about the potential impact the new technology could have on employment.

However, a new study from the Yale University appeared to bust that myth, saying that the AI job loss frenzy is more of a myth than fact.

AI job loss: What did the Yale study say?

The Yale report says that the spooked reaction at the Silicon Valley and other tech hubs of the world relating to AI replacing jobs at a large scale remains speculative.

“While anxiety over the effects of AI on today’s labor market is widespread, our data suggests it remains largely speculative,” according to the study from Yale’s Budget Lab, a policy research centre on economics.

The report has been based on researches’ analysis of US job data from the past 33 months since ChatGPT got released in 2022, the employment status of college graduates, and how exposed different workers at different levels are to AI.

Also Read | AI isn’t really stealing jobs yet. That doesn’t mean we’re ready for it.

Are you immune to AI?

In one of the analyses, researchers compared three groups of workers with varying levels of exposure to AI — high, medium and low. The researchers tracked if there have been any changes to the share in their workforce, only to find that the percentage did not budge a lot. This suggests that AI is not much of a factor even if workers are exposed to it stealing their jobs.

Also Read | TCS offering two years’ severance package to laid off employees: Report

Comparing technologies

Separately, the study also analysed the rate of change in the composition of US workforce and compared the data with two different time periods — when computers got popular in 1984, and the boom in internet entrepreneurship in 1996. Surprisingly, researchers found that the US labour market’s composition in the AI era closely matches the pace when computers and internet were getting popular, suggesting that the new technology no more disruptive than the preceding ones.

What about college graduates?

The Yale study also took into account how AI might be affecting recent college graduates, comparing the job distribution of people between the ages of 20 and 24, with older adults in the age group of 25 to 34. The researchers found that both the groups had similar occupational mix and career paths, suggesting that AI did not have much impact on entry-level jobs as well.

Also Read | Google layoffs: Tech giant fires 100 employees amid AI push — What we know

What’s behind job loss?

The disruption over the last few months among entry level jobs has been attributed to a cooling job market rather than AI, according to the Yale study.

“The picture of AI’s impact on the labor market that emerges from our data is one that largely reflects stability, not major disruption at an economy-wide level,” the study reads.

But who really is the culprit?

According to the study, the depressing Bureau of Labor Statistics can be attributed to various factors, one of them being the US Federal Reserve’s decision to put a stop to the zero-interest rate policy in 2022, the year when ChatGPT was launched. Before that, companies could borrow massive amounts of capitals at cheap interest rates that would fuel their business.

Another reason for the data can be the fact that now there are simply more college graduates with high degrees than there are entry-level jobs, a phenomenon that predates the ChatGPT era.

“While generative AI looks likely to join the ranks of transformative, general purpose technologies, it is too soon to tell how disruptive the technology will be to jobs,” as per the Yale study.