Oracle plans to lay off up to 45,000 people. Atlassian axed 1,600. And both say it's because of AI.
Really?
Atlassian's CEO said the layoffs would "self-fund further investment in AI and enterprise sales." Also, Atlassian confessed that AI "doesn't change the mix of skills we need or the number of roles required." So, you're cutting people to fund AI, not because AI replaced them.
Analysts say Oracle will spend tens of billions on new AI data centers and could be in negative cash flow for years. The cuts aren't about robots taking jobs. They're about freeing up cash to build what you'd need if you ever replace jobs with AI.
AI washing
There's a term for it now: AI washing. Cuts for every reason but AI, disguised as AI investment.
It's convenient for everyone. Investors hear "AI strategy" and nod approvingly. Executives frame layoffs as forward-thinking instead of cost-cutting. And laid-off employees get told they were replaced by the future, not by a spreadsheet.
The numbers don't lie
Over 45,000 tech jobs were eliminated in March 2026. About 9,200 were attributed to AI and automation. The rest? Reorganizations. Over-hiring cleanups. Economic pressure. The same reasons companies have always cut people.
AI will take work. It's taking work right now. But the spending today hasn't reached the point where companies are slashing jobs because of AI productivity. They're slashing jobs to fund a possible AI future.
This isn't new work for machines. This is old work for PowerPoint.
Next time a company announces layoffs "because of AI," ask the follow-up: is AI doing their job now, or are you just funding your AI bet with their salary?
Top comments (1)
I haven't even thought about that. It's surprising that it slipped my mind that it's the result of fueling more money for the possibility of AI and not because of AI productivity. Quite eye opening for me since I thought the layoffs were due to people using AI and they don't need a lot of people as a result.
Great post!