Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. Computing
  3. News

Digital Trends may earn a commission when you buy through links on our site. Why trust us?

AI could replace around 7,800 jobs at IBM as part of a hiring pause

Add as a preferred source on Google

A valid concern that is often brought up in the discourse surrounding AI and automation is the prospect that many jobs could disappear due to being replaced by the new technology. And the latest example of this is the recent news that IBM may include the use of AI and automation in its plans to pause hiring for certain roles within the company.

Bloomberg has reported that among IBM’s plans for a hiring pause for certain “back-office functions,” IBM could replace approximately 7,800 jobs with AI and automation over a span of five years.

Recommended Videos

In an interview with IBM CEO Arvind Krishna, further details about the hiring pause were also mentioned, including that the hiring pause involves around 26,000 jobs for “non-customer-facing roles” (like human resources) and that 30% of those roles could be replaced by AI. Krishna also noted a few examples of tasks that could be fully automated: the moving of employees between departments and issuing employment verification letters.

If IBM does move forward with replacing 7,800 of its jobs with AI, it would fall in line with a recent report from investment banking company Goldman Sachs. According to the BBC, the report estimated that the “equivalent of 300 million full-time jobs” could be replaced by AI.

The report mentioned that AI could have different effects among industries when it comes to job loss: 46% and 44% of tasks could be automated in administrative and legal jobs, respectively, while only 6% and 4% of tasks for construction and maintenance jobs would be affected by AI. The report also noted that AI, like other technologies, could also bring in new jobs and new occupations.

Anita George
Anita George has been writing for Digital Trends' Computing section since 2018. So for almost six years, Anita has written…
AI may have just won a literary prize. My heart weeps seeing it poison our love for books.
updated book and AI photo

I had a hard time processing this news. As someone who has been deeply in love with stories since childhood and who grew up on the works of Arthur Conan Doyle, Terry Pratchett, J.R.R. Tolkien, and other such venerable authors, seeing an AI-written story win a prestigious writing award is hard to digest. 

If you are unaware, the winners for the Commonwealth Short Story Prize for 2026 were announced, and three of the five winning regional stories have been found to be entirely or partially written by AI. Or at least that seems to be the consensus among readers. As a reader and an amateur fiction writer, this hurt me deeper than any other tale of AI corroding our lives.

Read more
Canva and Adobe are coming to Gemini, and they want to make everything chatty
Adobe and Canva are plugging into Google’s assistant, betting that creative work starts with a prompt, not an app icon
Art, Collage, Photography

Canva and Adobe are moving deeper into Google Gemini, giving the assistant a bigger role before users ever open a design app.

Adobe says its "Adobe for creativity" connector is coming to Gemini in the coming weeks, giving users a way to describe tasks and send them through Adobe tools for imaging, design, and video. Canva is already rolling out its Connected App for Gemini in select English-language markets, with full availability coming soon.

Read more
AI can pass the Turing Test in live chats and appear more human than us. I am spooked now
UC San Diego researchers found GPT-4.5 was judged human 73% of the time in live conversations
Image of a human woman next to an AI-generated face with Real or Fake text at the bottom.

AI can pass the Turing Test in live chats, and the latest result lands with a chill. In a UC San Diego study, GPT-4.5 outperformed real participants at convincing judges there was a person on the other side.

The setup was harder to shrug off than a standard benchmark. Judges reacted to real-time exchanges rather than static prompts, then made a fast call based on conversation alone.

Read more