Last year, Google CEO Sundar Pichai said AI might be able to easily do the job of a CEO one day. Almost a year later, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg said he is working on it. Both statements went viral for understandable reasons, making everyone invested circle back to the debate and fears of AI taking over a majority of the jobs and livelihood of humans across the globe.
In the early stages of artificial intelligence, a few job profiles were a given collateral damage, but there are surprisingly many fields believed to be immune to the wrath of AI. Last year, in an interview, Google CEO Sundar Pichai said AI was advancing so rapidly that over the next 12 months the technology will be capable of performing complex tasks and act as agents. What a CEO does may be one of those tasks, he added.
A degree won’t save you, but adaptability will
So where does technology stop being an existential threat and start being an asset?
A mere degree can’t save human resources from the wrath of AI, however, a human touch can. Last year, Bill Gates predicted only three jobs will survive AI—those in the field of coding, energy sector and medical research. Several industry leaders and tech giants have shared similar takes in the recent past on the jobs that will resist automation.
Last year, a Microsoft research paper listed out 40 professions assessed to be most at risk from the rise of automation and artificial intelligence. While a few professions like translators and sales representatives have been long predicted to be the worst hit, historians, sales representatives, journalists, writers, authors, proof readers, public relations specialists, geographers have also figured on the list. Although a career in these fields might not disappear overnight, a pause on future hiring and restructuring of already existing roles is on the anvil.
So is it all doom and gloom, with humans unemployed like in a dystopian movie plot? The research paper also lists 40 professions least at threat; with roofers, massage therapists, helpers, ophthalmic medical technicians, surgical assistants, cement masons, concrete finishers, dishwashers, prosthodontists, maids, housekeeping cleaners being some of the them. The industry has been quick to sense a strong connecting thread of human touch, judgment and adaptability in all these roles.
Also read: Punjab and Haryana HC bars AI use in judgments
Speaking at Italian Tech Week 2025, Jeff Bezos said “creatives should be safe,” as AI cannot effectively create ideas of its own. It also cannot, as yet, be expected to display distinct human qualities like empathy, intuition and the irreplaceable human touch—all of which happen to be overriding factors in several career options like midwives, nurses, therapists, counsellors.
At a time when companies like Amazon, with worldwide public and media scrutiny, openly announce AI-driven workforce reductions, it is time to monitor not just the ethics of developing and employing AI but even laying off workforce driven by artificial intelligence.
“I don’t see how anybody can be discouraged who is alive,” added Bezos at the Italian Tech Week. Within roughly a week of making the statement, Amazon laid off 14,000 employees, who were let go across the corporate workforce. A few months later, the company announced that it planned to eliminate about 16,000 corporate jobs marking its second round of mass layoffs.
In a blog post, the company justified the job cuts calling it, “a part of an ongoing effort to strengthen the organisation by reducing layers and removing bureaucracy.” However, the coincidence with a push to invest heavily in AI was not lost on those watching.
At a time when technology and automation is bent on cutting and replicating jobs, it seems laws and regulations can step in. For instance, the Gujarat High Court prohibiting the use of AI for any form of decision-making, judicial reasoning, considering bail applications, drafting the order, or any substantive adjudicatory process.
Unveiled this week, the high court’s AI policy mandates that AI be used only to improve the speed and quality of justice delivery rather than as a replacement for judicial reasoning. The policy confines AI to the narrowest conceivable role, purely metadata driven case allocation, research of legal principles. The policy also allows judicial officers and court staff to leverage AI tools in clerical capacity to improve productivity, reduce administrative burden, while preserving sanctity of judicial reasoning.
To adopt or to ban, is not the question. At the world forums, questions like “Will AI change the world? have long given way to “How can humans and nations adapt to AI?” At this year’s World Economic Forum, Elon Musk in his debut appearance gave ample fodder for AI fear mongers and cheerleaders alike, claiming that “by the end of 2026, AI will surpass human intelligence.”
If that wasn’t enough to excite or unsettle, he added, “By 2030 or 2031, AI will be smarter than the collective wisdom of all humans.” More data and information on AI-proof jobs and regulations to restrict AI from certain jobs is the need of the hour.
By Manpriya Singh
Follow us
