Is AI Taking Entry-Level Jobs? The Debate Over the Future of Work

Artificial intelligence is no longer a futuristic idea. Since the launch of ChatGPT in late 2022 and the rapid spread of similar tools, AI has started to touch nearly every industry. But along with the excitement has come a serious question: is AI cutting into the entry-level jobs that young workers need to start their careers?

The latest research points in two directions. Some studies show that young people in highly exposed occupations are already facing shrinking opportunities. Others argue that AI is not destroying jobs overall but changing how work is done and who benefits from it. Experts are divided, but most agree that this is a turning point for the labor market.

Evidence That AI Is Eliminating Entry-Level Opportunities

A new study by Stanford University economists Erik Brynjolfsson, Bharat Chandar, and Ruyu Chen provides some of the strongest evidence yet that AI is reshaping employment for young workers. By analyzing payroll data from ADP, which tracks millions of employees, they were able to measure job changes across age groups and industries.

“There’s a clear, evident change when you specifically look at young workers who are highly exposed to AI,” Brynjolfsson explained. Their findings showed that jobs in software development, customer service, translation, and receptionist work—all fields where generative AI can automate tasks—have declined among younger employees.

The numbers are striking. Among software developers aged 22 to 25, the head count was nearly 20 percent lower in July 2025 compared with its late 2022 peak. The economists also found that overall employment for 22- to 25-year-olds in AI-exposed jobs has fallen by 13 percent since 2022. Meanwhile, older workers in the same roles have held steady or even grown in numbers.

Brynjolfsson warned of a larger paradox. Senior workers often bring irreplaceable knowledge that cannot be automated, such as how to collaborate across teams or manage client needs. But if entry-level roles disappear, how will the next generation gain those skills? “If the only way to develop that knowledge is to put in time doing work that AI has largely automated away, who will replace today’s experts when they retire?” he asked.

The implications reach beyond numbers. Bank of America Global Research has found that unemployment rates for recent graduates have begun to rise above the national average, a reversal of long-standing trends. Goldman Sachs has noted that the value of a college degree is shrinking in the job market. These developments suggest that entry-level roles, once a launchpad for careers, are becoming harder to secure.

Evidence That AI Is Not Destroying Jobs Overall

Other experts argue that these fears should be viewed in context. A report from the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis studied AI adoption and exposure across industries. It found that occupations with the highest AI exposure, such as computational and mathematical fields, did see higher unemployment, but the increase was modest—just 1.2 percentage points between 2022 and 2025. By contrast, jobs with low AI exposure, such as personal services, saw almost no increase in unemployment.

Some economists caution against attributing too much to AI alone. “Everyone was online during the pandemic and tech had record profits,” said Matthew Mittelsteadt of the Cato Institute. He argued that the declines seen after 2022 may reflect a post-pandemic correction rather than purely an AI effect.

Others question how reliable current adoption data is. Will Rinehart of the American Enterprise Institute noted, “To know the actual ‘actual AI adoption’ rate, we need log file usage data from Anthropic and OpenAI.” Without such direct evidence, it is difficult to measure exactly how much AI has been adopted by firms and how much it is driving job losses.

Robert Atkinson, president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, adds historical perspective. He points to past examples, like bowling alley pinsetters and elevator operators, whose jobs were replaced by machines. “Entire categories of jobs were wiped out, yet automation has never created a mass lumpenproletariat,” he wrote. Instead, the savings from automation lowered prices, created new demand, and generated new occupations. Atkinson believes AI will follow the same pattern.

Automation Versus Augmentation

A central point in this debate is whether AI primarily replaces workers or helps them do their jobs better. Brynjolfsson and his team observed that young workers in occupations where AI is more augmentative actually saw employment growth that exceeded overall job growth. For instance, medical professionals using AI to assist with diagnoses can work faster and more accurately, making them more valuable to employers.

“I was delighted to see in the data that indeed, this augmentation approach could benefit people and lead to more employment,” Brynjolfsson said. He believes that the real value of AI lies in creating new opportunities, not just cutting costs. “Simply automating tasks that people do can save money, but it doesn’t really create anything new. What’s more valuable is doing new things that extend people’s capabilities,” he explained.

This distinction is vital. In fields where AI is seen as a replacement, such as coding routine functions or handling standard customer service inquiries, young workers are struggling. In fields where AI is a tool for augmentation, workers are experiencing growth and opportunities that may not have existed before.

What AI Does Better Than Entry-Level Workers

AI tools excel at routine, codified, and knowledge-heavy tasks that young employees often start with. Large language models can write code, draft legal documents, translate text, and answer customer questions with speed and accuracy that humans cannot match. For employers, this creates obvious cost savings and efficiency gains.

But there are limits. AI cannot easily replicate the nuance of human interaction, the creativity of problem-solving in messy situations, or the intuition that comes with experience. A senior software engineer might not only code but also design a product that meets a company’s broader goals. A receptionist might not only answer phones but also manage office dynamics and relationships. These are skills that remain uniquely human.

The Societal Cost of AI’s Rise

The debate is not just about jobs but about fairness and the future of opportunity. Smart business leaders will adopt AI because it saves money and improves productivity. Yet if entry-level roles disappear, society could face a shortage of trained experts in the long run and a generation of young people left behind.

Brynjolfsson suggested that companies may need to rethink how workers are trained. “I think that we’ll have to more explicitly train people, as opposed to just hoping that they will figure these things out on their own,” he said. Some firms are experimenting with apprenticeships or AI-assisted training to fill the gap.

The World Economic Forum warns that AI could displace nine million jobs by 2030 while creating 11 million new ones. But that shift will not be even. Nearly half of Gen Z job seekers already believe AI has reduced the value of their college degrees. For many, the career ladder is narrowing at the very bottom.

A Debate That Demands Fairness

The evidence shows that AI is both eliminating and creating opportunities. It is reducing entry-level employment in certain fields while boosting productivity and growth in others. Whether this becomes a long-term crisis or simply a transition depends on how governments, educators, and businesses respond.

AI is here to stay. The real debate is whether society can adapt to ensure that young people still have pathways into meaningful careers. The choice is between letting automation quietly erode entry-level opportunities or designing systems that harness AI’s strengths while protecting the next generation of workers.

The post Is AI Taking Entry-Level Jobs? The Debate Over the Future of Work appeared first on The Punching Bag Post.