AI's Impact on American Job Insecurity: A Sociologist's Perspective on 'American Exceptionalism'

The US really is unlike other rich countries when it comes to job insecurity - and AI could make it even more 'exceptional'

College of the Holy Cross provides funding as a member of The Conversation US. How will AI affect American workers? There are two major narratives floating around. The "techno-optimist" view is that AI will free humans from boring tasks and create new jobs, while the "techno-pessimist" view is that AI will lead to widespread unemployment. As a sociologist who studies job insecurity, I'm among the pessimists. And that's not just because of AI itself. It's about something deeper - what scholars call "American exceptionalism." While people commonly use this phrase to refer to anything that makes the U.S. unique, I use it narrowly to refer to the country's approach to work and social welfare, which is quite different from the systems in other rich countries. I suspect AI will "turbocharge" American exceptionalism in ways that make workers more afraid of losing their jobs. When fused with organizations' adoption of new types of AI, workers' fears may soon become reality, if they haven't already. An 'exceptional' system for American workers Let's start with what makes the U.S. different, especially from other rich countries. The U.S. has relatively low levels of unionization, an "at-will" employment system, a modest welfare state, and a two-party system that lacks a social democratic tradition. Many wealthy countries boast higher unionization rates, stricter protections against being fired, and - particularly in Europe - more robust welfare states. In other words, even before AI came into the picture, American workers were facing a system stacked against them. This tendency grew more pronounced starting in the late 1970s, with Democrats and Republicans alike pursuing reforms such as stripping regulations and rolling back the welfare state. Between 1983 and 2022, unionization rates fell by more than 50%; they remain low today. In the 1990s, President Bill Clinton pledged to "end welfare as we know it" and followed with a law slashing support programs. Meanwhile, U.S. workers' inflation-adjusted wages have stagnated and income inequality has risen since the 1970s. The current Trump administration has taken these "exceptional" traits even further. From firing the head of the National Labor Relations Board to his executive order undermining federal employee unions, Trump has usurped the power of regulatory agencies and workers themselves. And more cuts to the welfare state are coming now that Trump's domestic policy bill has been signed into law, including reductions in food aid and health insurance. One telling example is the Trump administration's mass firing of federal workers. While they are making their way through the courts, these efforts are notable for targeting government positions that have long been thought to be the most secure jobs. As a sociologist, I think it's fair to say that the U.S. is even more "exceptional" than it was just a year ago. This trend lays the foundation for U.S. workers to fear losing their jobs, for employers to cut workers loose, and for people to struggle making ends meet. American exceptionalism, meet AI To understand what's happening, it helps to look at the different kinds of artificial intelligence, which generally refers to machines such as computers that can perform tasks comparably to humans. One type is predictive AI, which is what powers your streaming and social media recommendations. The second type is generative AI, which is used to create seemingly novel content. ChatGPT and other large language models fall in this category. The third type, agentic AI, cannot only predict and plan outcomes but also can act autonomously to achieve those outcomes. Self-driving cars are perhaps the most well-known example. Companies are increasingly using generative AI to boost productivity. According to Stanford University's 2025 AI index report, generative AI has already surpassed human performance on a range of tasks, including visual reasoning and answering competition-level math and Ph.D.-level science questions. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics has warned that generative AI will affect jobs across a range of industries. I think agentic AI will have dramatic implications for the workforce. Companies are already beginning to use it for customer service in industries from finance to travel. As if on cue, OpenAI recently released ChatGPT agent, which it says can handle "complex tasks from start to finish." When you combine technological advancements - such as the current transition to generative AI and the likely broader agentic AI transition - with turbocharged American exceptionalism, you get a formula for job insecurity and displacement. How AI might affect the future of job security Interestingly, despite having fewer protections from firing and a more threadbare unemployment system, American workers are no more afraid of losing their jobs than workers in other rich countries, research shows. These perceptions are generally constant over time, but they spike as a result of certain economic reforms and during recessions. Among the findings in my own research on free-market-driven economic reforms in Europe, people were most worried about losing their jobs in countries that had ratcheted up such policies within the past five years. That trend has important implications for the United States. Recent polling shows that about a third of U.S. workers believe AI will hurt their jobs or job opportunities. Business leaders say they expect job losses in the service industries, supply chain management and human resources over the next three years. There's no shortage of predictions about AI-driven job gains and losses, but solid data is hard to come by - and don't even bother asking most companies about AI-related layoffs. On one hand, business leaders surveyed by McKinsey in 2024 reported high demand for new jobs such as "AI compliance specialist" and "AI ethics specialist," which are the kinds of new roles that techno-optimists say will be created by AI. On the other hand, it's no small irony that AI was reportedly used to facilitate the mass firing of federal workers and may soon replace some Department of Education workers' jobs. America's fusion of limited labor protections and aggressive AI adoption could create the perfect storm for widespread job insecurity. While unions have organized for AI-related job protections, and states are attempting to regulate AI, the U.S.'s path realistically depends less on workers' and local politicians' actions than what companies do. And I think companies' increasing integration of AI will likely hurt American workers more than it helps. If nothing changes, job insecurity may become the new normal.

The US really is unlike other rich countries when it comes to job insecurity. AI could make it even more 'exceptional'

How will AI affect American workers? There are two major narratives floating around. The "techno-optimist" view is that AI will free humans from boring tasks and create new jobs, while the "techno-pessimist" view is that AI will lead to widespread unemployment. As a sociologist who studies job insecurity, I'm among the pessimists. And that's not just because of AI itself. It's about something deeper -- what scholars call "American exceptionalism." While people commonly use this phrase to refer to anything that makes the U.S. unique, I use it narrowly to refer to the country's approach to work and social welfare, which is quite different from the systems in other rich countries. I suspect AI will "turbocharge" American exceptionalism in ways that make workers more afraid of losing their jobs. When fused with organizations' adoption of new types of AI, workers' fears may soon become reality, if they haven't already. An 'exceptional' system for American workers Let's start with what makes the U.S. different, especially from other rich countries. The U.S. has relatively low levels of unionization, an "at-will" employment system, a modest welfare state, and a two-party system that lacks a social democratic tradition. Many wealthy countries boast higher unionization rates, stricter protections against being fired, and -- particularly in Europe -- more robust welfare states. In other words, even before AI came into the picture, American workers were facing a system stacked against them. This tendency grew more pronounced starting in the late 1970s, with Democrats and Republicans alike pursuing reforms such as stripping regulations and rolling back the welfare state. Between 1983 and 2022, unionization rates fell by more than 50%; they remain low today. In the 1990s, President Bill Clinton pledged to "end welfare as we know it" and followed with a law slashing support programs. Meanwhile, U.S. workers' inflation-adjusted wages have stagnated and income inequality has risen since the 1970s. The current Trump administration has taken these "exceptional" traits even further. From firing the head of the National Labor Relations Board to his executive order undermining federal employee unions, Trump has usurped the power of regulatory agencies and workers themselves. And more cuts to the welfare state are coming now that Trump's domestic policy bill has been signed into law, including reductions in food aid and health insurance. One telling example is the Trump administration's mass firing of federal workers. While they are making their way through the courts, these efforts are notable for targeting government positions that have long been thought to be the most secure jobs. As a sociologist, I think it's fair to say that the U.S. is even more "exceptional" than it was just a year ago. This trend lays the foundation for U.S. workers to fear losing their jobs, for employers to cut workers loose, and for people to struggle making ends meet. American exceptionalism, meet AI To understand what's happening, it helps to look at the different kinds of artificial intelligence, which generally refers to machines such as computers that can perform tasks comparably to humans. One type is predictive AI, which is what powers your streaming and social media recommendations. The second type is generative AI, which is used to create seemingly novel content. ChatGPT and other large language models fall in this category. The third type, agentic AI, cannot only predict and plan outcomes but also can act autonomously to achieve those outcomes. Self-driving cars are perhaps the most well-known example. Companies are increasingly using generative AI to boost productivity. According to Stanford University's 2025 AI index report, generative AI has already surpassed human performance on a range of tasks, including visual reasoning and answering competition-level math and Ph.D.-level science questions. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics has warned that generative AI will affect jobs across a range of industries. I think agentic AI will have dramatic implications for the workforce. Companies are already beginning to use it for customer service in industries from finance to travel. As if on cue, OpenAI recently released ChatGPT agent, which it says can handle "complex tasks from start to finish." When you combine technological advancements -- such as the current transition to generative AI and the likely broader agentic AI transition -- with turbocharged American exceptionalism, you get a formula for job insecurity and displacement. How AI might affect the future of job security Interestingly, despite having fewer protections from firing and a more threadbare unemployment system, American workers are no more afraid of losing their jobs than workers in other rich countries, research shows. These perceptions are generally constant over time, but they spike as a result of certain economic reforms and during recessions. Among the findings in my own research on free-market-driven economic reforms in Europe, people were most worried about losing their jobs in countries that had ratcheted up such policies within the past five years. That trend has important implications for the United States. Recent polling shows that about a third of U.S. workers believe AI will hurt their jobs or job opportunities. Business leaders say they expect job losses in the service industries, supply chain management and human resources over the next three years. There's no shortage of predictions about AI-driven job gains and losses, but solid data is hard to come by -- and don't even bother asking most companies about AI-related layoffs. On one hand, business leaders surveyed by McKinsey in 2024 reported high demand for new jobs such as "AI compliance specialist" and "AI ethics specialist," which are the kinds of new roles that techno-optimists say will be created by AI. On the other hand, it's no small irony that AI was reportedly used to facilitate the mass firing of federal workers and may soon replace some Department of Education workers' jobs. America's fusion of limited labor protections and aggressive AI adoption could create the perfect storm for widespread job insecurity. While unions have organized for AI-related job protections, and states are attempting to regulate AI, the U.S."s path realistically depends less on workers' and local politicians' actions than what companies do. And I think companies' increasing integration of AI will likely hurt American workers more than it helps. If nothing changes, job insecurity may become the new normal. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

As AI amplifies American exceptionalism, job insecurity could become the new norm

How will AI affect American workers? There are two major narratives floating around. The "techno-optimist" view is that AI will free humans from boring tasks and create new jobs, while the "techno-pessimist" view is that AI will lead to widespread unemployment. As a sociologist who studies job insecurity, I'm among the pessimists. And that's not just because of AI itself. It's about something deeper -- what scholars call "American exceptionalism." While people commonly use this phrase to refer to anything that makes the U.S. unique, I use it narrowly to refer to the country's approach to work and social welfare, which is quite different from the systems in other rich countries. I suspect AI will "turbocharge" American exceptionalism in ways that make workers more afraid of losing their jobs. When fused with organizations' adoption of new types of AI, workers' fears may soon become reality, if they haven't already. Let's start with what makes the U.S. different, especially from other rich countries.

This Sociologist Says American Workers Will Suffer the Most in the Global AI Jobs Crisis

AI is, definitely impacting the job market, as many reports show -- though ChatGPT denies it's happening, offering an upbeat interpretation of its revolutionary effects on the U.S. workplace. "I don't literally steal jobs, but I can change how certain kinds of work are done," the AI tool said when quizzed by Inc. For now the direct threat to workers' livelihoods is limited to a few business sectors and age groups, but as AI tools become more sophisticated it's evident that AI is really going to upend work all over the world. Now a new report by an expert sociologist shines an unexpected spotlight on the issue, particularly for U.S. workers: AI job losses in the U.S., he worries, could be "exceptional." Jeff Dixon, professor of sociology and anthropology at the College of the Holy Cross in Worcester, Massachusetts, says that as someone who "studies job insecurity," he's definitely "among the pessimists" when it comes to talking about AI and work. Writing at expert news site The Conversation, he says it's not just because of the power of AI tools themselves. It's "about something deeper." Specifically, Dixon thinks that "American exceptionalism," when applied to "the country's approach to work and social welfare," which stands out as being "quite different from the systems in other rich countries," may actually "turbocharge" the effect AI has on the workplace, making U.S, workers "more afraid of losing their jobs." At the core of the problem, Dixon thinks, is the fact that across the U.S. "at will" employment status, which offers fewer job protections than say, employment laws in the European Union, applies widely here. Other nations also have higher rates of unionization, and stronger protections against a worker being fired -- on-the-spot firings are rare in some industrialized countries. Also, European welfare states and social safety nets are more developed than in the U.S. This is amplified under the current Trump administration, which has set its sights on cutting spending on support networks, and has aggressively cut costs by laying off hundreds of thousands of federal workers. You may think American workers, reading about the latest breakthroughs in AI tech, and aware of the social and political headwinds now blowing, might be more worried than their European counterparts -- but Dixon points to research suggesting U.S. staff have the same level of worries as workers elsewhere. This might be a case of national overconfidence. Dixon ended his essay by neatly summarizing the situation. Our national "fusion of limited labor protections and aggressive AI adoption could create the perfect storm for widespread job insecurity," he wrote. Efforts to hedge against job security risks from AI tech, include union initiatives to protect their members against AI-based job replacements, and even state-based regulatory pushes. But Dixon's expertise leads him to think that what will really impact how AI advances is not the workers' or politicians' efforts, but instead what companies do. The urge to cut costs, boost efficiency and drive up profits by adopting AI tech is likely to "hurt American workers more than it helps." And ultimately, as AI becomes ubiquitous, "If nothing changes, job insecurity may become the new normal." Fascinatingly, when your writer asked ChatGPT about this, it more or less agreed with Dixon: the biggest risk, the AI thinks, is "how companies and governments choose to use AI." If they use it to "cut costs without creating new opportunities, then people may lose out," ChatGPT suggested, taking the pessimistic line that Dixon favors. Conversely, ChatGPT said, if organizations "use it to boost productivity, free up time, and spark new industries, then it could expand what humans do." Why should you care about this? If you're leading a smaller company, you may think your team size is just right, and you may have no plans to downsize or outright replace anyone with an AI tool. But odds are that you'll be rolling out AI for your workers in increasing numbers as time goes by, with hopes of boosting their productivity and freeing them up from mundane office tasks to actually do their "real" work. Still, your staff may already be quietly worrying that AI will replace them. There's even a "task masking" trend observed in Gen-Z workers, who pretend to be busier than they really are to ensure they're not replaced by an automated system. If Dixon's worries prove right, and AI really does begin to change the American workplace, you might want to take the time to reassure your staff that you value their unique human qualities, and that their jobs are safe, despite the bigger picture playing out in the background. The final deadline for the 2025 Inc. Best in Business Awards is Friday, September 12, at 11:59 p.m. PT. Apply now.