Summary
This ESL lesson for C1 English students explores the profound impact of AI on the modern workforce, focusing on potential challenges for employers and employees. Students will delve into discussions about AI-driven layoffs, the restructuring of workforces, and the critical issue of skill development and talent pipelines. The lesson utilizes an insightful video to prompt discussions on these complex topics.
This material helps advanced students analyze the long-term economic and social implications of artificial intelligence. Activities include a warm-up discussion on AI's job market impact, a listening comprehension task, and vocabulary matching for specialized terms. Students will practice using modal verbs of deduction to express certainty and possibility, engage with workplace idioms, and apply their understanding in a speaking practice session.
Activities
- A warm-up discussion about students' initial thoughts on AI's impact on jobs and personal experiences with technology in the workplace.
- A video listening comprehension exercise where students fill in blanks from a video discussing how AI layoffs might hurt employers in the long run.
- A vocabulary matching task to solidify understanding of key terms like "skyrocketed," "organizational flattening," and "novice-expert bond."
- A grammar exercise focusing on modal verbs of deduction (present and past) to express certainty or possibility about workplace situations.
- Practice with workplace idioms and phrases such as "save a buck" and "climb the corporate ladder."
- A vocabulary in context exercise using the key terms to complete sentences.
- A grammar practice section for rewriting sentences using modals of deduction.
- A speaking practice section with discussion questions, encouraging students to apply new vocabulary and grammar to express opinions on the future of work and potential solutions.
Layoff announcements skyrocketed toward the end
of 2025, as generative AI and economic tightening
pressure corporations to restructure their
workforces. Many companies are cutting costs by
trimming middle management and,
in certain industries, eliminating entry level
roles that can be replaced by AI.
But layoffs aren't the only thing experts are concerned
about. Generative AI is speeding up how people work,
but that efficiency can come at the trade off of
maintaining skills and rising up the corporate
ladder.
It might save a buck now.
The challenge becomes, in a few years down the
road, where is the pipeline of talent to move into those
really important middle ranks of your company?
I think there's going to be a market failure,
whereby companies are reticent to really continue
to invest in training young people,
instead of just simply turning to the cheaper AI to
do those tasks if they fear some competitor is just
going to poach.
The way you make a senior employee is not through
school. It's by doing the job alongside someone who
knows more. And you learn by doing.
And that's where the bulk of our skill comes from.
Here's how AI may be killing people's chances at a
promotion.
Globally, nearly 40% of workers core skills will be disrupted by
2030 due to AI and digitalization.
But it may be more difficult for entry-level employees to
build the skills they need due to organizational
flattening.
The process for building skill has been the same for
about 160,000 years, and it consists of trying to
do something that is close to the edge of your
capability, but not at it, alongside someone who
actually has already done it repetitively and knows how
to do it, i.e. an expert.
So a novice and an expert working together on a real
problem. You work your way through a number of
problems, and eventually you find yourself with somebody
looking over your shoulder trying to learn from you.
New technology, such as generative AI allows
an expert to work faster, which means companies may
not preserve the novice expert bond in order to save
time and money.
In occupations where AI can perform most tasks,
the share of workers in that role fell by about 14% over
five years.
Why would I involve someone in the work that would slow
it down and make more mistakes if I don't have to?
The answer is I wouldn't.
I don't. I found this in robotic surgery in 2012
through 2014, and published studies about
that. Junior surgeons are now strictly optional in
robotic surgery. Instead of participating for 4.5 hours
in a four hour procedure, they participate for 10 to
15 minutes. That is still true,
and that is true at scale, now with LLMs.
So it's not about management, it's about
expert, novice and breaking that relationship.
The challenges. If everyone takes that mindset of I
can't guarantee these folks are going to stick around
and be my mid-level talent, I'm just going to save a
buck today. If everyone does that,
the entire pipeline of talent starts to collapse,
and in a few years, employers in lots of sectors
are going to find themselves in trouble.
Generative AI is currently able to do the work of some
entry-level employees, but right now at least,
it isn't capable of taking on more advanced tasks that
may require interpersonal skills or sensitive
judgment.
So think the law partner advising clients as opposed
to sort of sitting behind a desk and drafting contracts.
So the challenge is going to be what happens if employers
thin out their ranks of those early career jobs that
bridge education to that kind of expertise?
How in the world are young people going to get trained
up to come in at a level three,
if they haven't done level one and level two?
This is a really existential challenge for employers
because they might be excited to save on labor
costs today. So why am I going to invest in training
up if the billable hours aren't there with the young
lawyers? Why am I going to take on extra first year
associates that I don't need in the same leanest model.
Why would my competitor not just poach those young
people?
We need to expect that the economy is not investing to
keep this expert-novice relationship alive in the
work. In fact, we are aggressively breaking
that relationship through default use of AI.
And that means in 3 to 5 years,
whatever firms, organizations,
occupations, we're counting on that ladder continuing to
work are going to face a new nasty set of problems.
Cleanup is always harder than prevention.
This notion of how people are going to advance in
their careers, what is the training going
to look like? What has to happen first in higher-ed to
get them ready for these roles? But importantly,
what should employers be doing differently to train
up workers? If those early career low stakes,
but still well-paid roles, are thinning out?
You know, how do we make sure employers aren't just
optimizing only for the short run?
I personally think we probably need some public
policy tools and some outside intermediaries to
really help with this training challenge.
This is also a problem for companies.
63% of employers surveyed expect skills gaps in the
labor market to hinder organizational
transformation.
42% of employers expect talent availability to
decline between 2025 and 2030.
Beane says companies must re-engineer workflows that
include advanced technology but also allow novices to
participate.
The whole world has this huge,
inventive opportunity to say,
okay, this thing currently, if you use it in default
ways, is going to separate and weaken this bond between
experts and novices in the work.
Is there a way that it could make those things healthier?
I think the answer is absolutely yes.
Beane recommends the skill workers learn,
is how to learn and to be adaptable.
I call it meta-learning or meta-skill.
You need to learn the skills for getting good at
something, because the next thing you're going to have
to get good at, we haven't invented yet,
but it's coming faster than it ever has before.
Practice it repeatedly until A you can help yourself,
but B, much more importantly,
you can help other people, protect their skill.
And then maybe even design tech that can help everybody
not dumb themselves down with the current AI that
we've got. Firms that add new automation,
new classes of automation in their markets win and grow,
because they're more efficient. They outcompete
their competitors. The competitors are the ones
that shed jobs, typically.
So if you're seeing big layoffs from a firm that's
really well run right now, it's not because they're
needing to shrink because they're not efficient
enough. They're probably just thinking about how do
we need to rebuild ourselves for the future.
In general, the logic is if you want to grow healthily
over the mid and longer term,
you want to retain talent, redirect and head towards
you need to go, to the extent that you can.
Vocabulary focus
The vocabulary section introduces advanced terms from the video such as "skyrocketed," "reticent," "poach," "organizational flattening," "novice-expert bond," and "hinder." Students will learn to use these terms to discuss the economic and structural changes brought about by AI.
Grammar focus
This lesson concentrates on modal verbs of deduction (must have, might/may/could have, can't have) in both present and past forms. Students will practice expressing different levels of certainty and possibility when discussing the implications of AI on employment and corporate strategies.
AI Layoffs: Will They Hurt Employers? | C1 English Lesson
Access lesson
