AI and job cuts in Australia: what workers were told
Commentary: Harry Sidhu — Director and Principal Consultant, Aegentra · Research: Aegentra · Published 10 November 2026
Almost one in four working Australians (23.3%) say AI has already led to job cuts at their workplace. Fewer than a third of those workers (30.2%) say their employer named AI as the reason, and three in four working Australians (75.4%) want large and listed companies legally required to declare job reductions linked to AI.
Published 10 November 2026. Research: Aegentra. Commentary: Harry Sidhu, Director and Principal Consultant, Aegentra. Read the media release.
Key figures
| Figure | What it measures | Base |
|---|---|---|
| 23.3% | of working Australians say AI has already led to job cuts at their workplace | working respondents, n=2,775 |
| 69.8% | of workers who saw AI-related cuts say their employer gave another reason | workers who say AI led to job cuts at their workplace, n=640 |
| 20.4% | of those say they are aware of a deliberate effort to hide AI’s role | workers whose employer gave another reason, Q9, n=450 |
| 75.4% | want large and listed companies legally required to declare job reductions linked to AI | working Australians, pooled sample n=2,932 |
What workers say
Job cuts: almost one in four
23.3% of working Australians say AI has already led to job cuts at their workplace. The figure comes from a nationally representative survey of more than 2,900 working Australians, and its base is the working respondents asked the question (n=2,775).
This is what workers report seeing at their own workplace. It is not a count of jobs lost, and the survey does not measure how many roles were cut or whether AI was the only cause.
What employers said: AI named less than a third of the time
Of the 640 workers who say AI led to job cuts at their workplace, 30.2% say their employer named AI as the reason. The other 69.8% say their employer gave another reason, which leaves most of these workers to judge AI’s role for themselves.
What workers believe about the reason they were given
The chart divides the 640 workers into five groups: 30.2% whose employer named AI; 14.2% whose employer gave another reason and who believe AI’s role was deliberately hidden; 48.7% whose employer gave another reason and who see AI as a factor but no deliberate effort to hide it; 4.7% who say the reason they were given was genuine; and 2.2% who are not sure.
Read against the workers whose employer gave another reason (Q9, n=450), 90.1% say AI was a real factor, and 20.4% say they are aware of a deliberate effort to hide AI’s role.
The media release puts the same finding in its own words: “Of the workers who weren’t told AI was responsible, 62.9% still believe it was the real cause. One in five (20%) believe AI’s role was deliberately concealed.” Those figures are quoted as the release published them; the chart’s figures above are quoted as the chart published them.
Workers who saw AI-related job cuts, by what their employer said
Every worker who says AI led to job cuts at their workplace, divided first by what their employer said, then by what those workers make of the reason they were given. Shares of all 640 workers.
| What the employer said, and what workers make of it | Share of the 640 workers |
|---|---|
| Employer named AI | 30.2% |
| Another reason given: AI’s role deliberately hidden | 14.2% |
| Another reason given: AI a factor, no deliberate effort seen | 48.7% |
| Another reason given: say the reason given was genuine | 4.7% |
| Another reason given: not sure | 2.2% |
| Employer gave another reason (all four groups above it except “Employer named AI”) | 69.8% |
Of workers whose employer gave another reason, 90.1% say AI was a real factor, and 20.4% say they are aware of a deliberate effort to hide AI’s role.
Source: Aegentra research, AI and Job Cuts in Australia: Worker Survey 2026. Nationally representative survey, four pooled waves, n=2,932 working Australians, weighted to ABS benchmarks. Step 1: working respondents (n=2,775). Base for the bar: workers who say AI led to job cuts at their workplace (n=640); the split of those given another reason uses Q9 (n=450). Figures may not add due to rounding. Chart: Aegentra.
Three in four workers want large companies to disclose AI job cuts
Three in four working Australians (75.4%) want large and listed companies legally required to declare job reductions linked to AI. Just over half (51.5%) want penalties for misleading declarations, while only 12.0% oppose a disclosure requirement.
No such requirement exists in Australia today. The question asked workers what they want, not what the law currently says.
- 75.4% want large and listed companies legally required to declare job reductions linked to AI
- 51.5% want penalties for misleading declarations
- 12.0% oppose a disclosure requirement
Base: working Australians in the pooled survey (n=2,932). Aegentra research.
What Harry Sidhu said
Harry Sidhu is Director and Principal Consultant at Aegentra. His comments, as issued in the media release of 10 November 2026:
The release reports that on 4 November 2026 Canva announced changes affecting 1,271 people, or 22% of its workforce, including role changes, relocations and departures, and that Canva’s announcement pointed to new technology transforming what people create, without naming AI.
“‘Budget cuts’ sounds like the weather. ‘We chose to automate this work’ sounds like a decision. Most leaders would rather talk about the weather.”
“I don’t know Canva’s numbers, so I won’t guess at their reasons. I understand why an established company says it needs to return to small, empowered teams. But whatever the reasons, staff will read ‘new technology’ as AI anyway, so it’s better to be clear about the part it played and what support people will get.”
“Disclosure should be mandatory, and I’d set the threshold by turnover rather than headcount. Employers cutting 15 or more jobs for economic, technological or structural reasons already have to notify Services Australia, so add automation to that notice. Disclose the impact, not the inventory. Naming the tools a business relies on gives attackers a target list.”
What changes on 10 December 2026
From 10 December 2026, the Privacy and Other Legislation Amendment Act 2024 adds an automated decision-making transparency obligation to Australian Privacy Principle 1. An organisation’s privacy policy must say when it has arranged for a computer program to make, or do something substantially and directly related to making, a decision that could reasonably be expected to significantly affect an individual’s rights or interests, using personal information about them. The policy must describe the kinds of personal information used and the kinds of decisions involved. The obligation applies to decisions made from that date.
The media release notes that this includes recruitment decisions. A program that screens job applications, ranks candidates or informs who is rostered, redeployed or let go is the kind of system an employer should check against the new wording.
Most small businesses remain outside the Privacy Act. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner describes a small business as one with annual turnover of $3 million or less, with exceptions such as health service providers and businesses that opt in.
Two other dates sit beside it. Employers already have a duty under section 530 of the Fair Work Act 2009: an employer that decides to dismiss 15 or more employees for reasons of an economic, technological, structural or similar nature must give written notice to Services Australia (Centrelink) before the dismissals. And the parliamentary Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence is due to present its final report by 30 November 2026.
General information, not legal advice. Sources are listed at the end of this report.
What employers should do
This section is Aegentra’s opinion, written for an Australian employer that is changing roles because of automation. It is general information, not legal advice.
Say what part automation played
If a system changed the work, say so in the announcement and in the conversation with each person affected. The survey shows most workers form a view about AI’s role whether or not they are told; a plain statement of what changed, and what support is offered, is easier to stand behind than a reason nobody believes.
Record the decision before you announce it
Write down what the system does, which roles it affects, who approved the change and what alternatives were considered. That record answers the board, a regulator and the people affected with the same facts.
An AI management system under ISO/IEC 42001 gives that record a home: it asks for an AI system impact assessment that considers the consequences for individuals and groups affected by the system, and for defined roles and responsibilities for AI.
Check your privacy policy before 10 December 2026
List the programs that make, or substantially help make, decisions about people: application screening, candidate ranking, rostering, performance scoring. Where one could significantly affect someone’s rights or interests and uses their personal information, the privacy policy must describe the kinds of information and decisions from 10 December 2026.
Treat the section 530 notice as part of the plan
Where 15 or more dismissals are proposed for economic, technological, structural or similar reasons, the written notice to Services Australia is already required before they happen. Plan it with the consultation steps, not after them.
Disclose the impact, not the inventory
Public statements can describe how many roles changed and why without naming every tool, vendor and integration a business depends on. A published list of systems is useful reconnaissance for an attacker.
Deciding what to publish about your systems is part of managing information security risk, the work an ISO 27001 information security management system is built to do.
How the survey was run
This report is based on Aegentra research: a nationally representative survey of 3,911 Australians (2,932 in work), conducted for Aegentra by an independent Australian research firm, pooled across four waves conducted in July and August 2026 and weighted to ABS Labour Force Survey benchmarks for age, sex and state.
Bases: the working-population figures use the pooled sample of 2,932 working Australians; the job-cuts question was answered by 2,775 working respondents; the breakdown of what employers said uses the 640 workers who say AI led to job cuts at their workplace; the split of those given another reason uses Q9 (n=450).
The margin of error is ±1.9 percentage points on the working-population base. Smaller bases carry wider margins: Aegentra’s own calculation, assuming a simple random sample at 95% confidence, puts the margin for the 640 subgroup at about ±3.9 points.
Figures may not add due to rounding. Findings should be read alongside the published methodology, sources and limitations. Estimates are not guarantees of future outcomes.
The survey records what workers say they saw and believe. It does not establish why any employer cut jobs, and it does not identify employers.
This information is general in nature and does not constitute legal, tax or financial advice.
Questions about the survey
How many Australian workers say AI has cost jobs at their workplace?
23.3% of working Australians say AI has already led to job cuts at their workplace, in a nationally representative Aegentra survey (base: working respondents, n=2,775; fieldwork July and August 2026).
Do employers tell staff when AI is the reason for job cuts?
According to the workers surveyed, mostly not. Of the 640 workers who say AI led to job cuts at their workplace, 30.2% say their employer named AI as the reason and 69.8% say the employer gave another reason.
Do workers think AI’s role is being hidden?
Of workers whose employer gave another reason (n=450), 20.4% say they are aware of a deliberate effort to hide AI’s role, and 90.1% say AI was a real factor. The media release words it as one in five (20%) believing AI’s role was deliberately concealed.
Do Australians want AI job cuts to be disclosed?
Yes. 75.4% of working Australians want large and listed companies legally required to declare job reductions linked to AI, 51.5% want penalties for misleading declarations, and 12.0% oppose a disclosure requirement.
What changes for employers on 10 December 2026?
Privacy Act amendments require an organisation’s privacy policy to explain when computer programs make, or do things substantially and directly related to making, decisions that could significantly affect people and that use their personal information. Most small businesses with annual turnover of $3 million or less remain exempt from the Privacy Act.
Do employers already have to report redundancies to the government?
Yes, in one case. Under section 530 of the Fair Work Act 2009, an employer that decides to dismiss 15 or more employees for economic, technological, structural or similar reasons must give written notice to Services Australia (Centrelink) before the dismissals. Harry Sidhu’s proposal, in the media release, is to add automation to that notice.
Who owns the research and how was it weighted?
The research is Aegentra’s. The survey of 3,911 Australians (2,932 in work) was conducted for Aegentra by an independent Australian research firm across four waves in July and August 2026, weighted to ABS Labour Force Survey benchmarks for age, sex and state. The margin of error is ±1.9 percentage points on the working-population base.
Sources
- Aegentra, media release, 10 November 2026. All survey figures and the quotes from Harry Sidhu.
- Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, APP 1.7 to 1.9 transparency obligation fact sheet (September 2026). Automated decision-making transparency in privacy policies from 10 December 2026. Checked 11 November 2026.
- Office of the Australian Information Commissioner, Small business. Annual turnover of $3 million or less, and the exceptions. Checked 11 November 2026.
- Fair Work Act 2009, section 530 (Federal Register of Legislation). Notice to Centrelink of 15 or more proposed dismissals. Checked 11 November 2026.
- Services Australia, Redundancy information for employers. How employers give the notice. Checked 11 November 2026.
- Parliament of Australia, Joint Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence. Final report to be presented by 30 November 2026. Checked 11 November 2026.
- Canva newsroom, An important update on our team. Canva’s own announcement. The figures on this page are as the media release reported them.
How to cite
Aegentra (2026). AI and Job Cuts in Australia: Worker Survey 2026. Media release, 10 November 2026. https://aegentra.com.au/reports/ai-job-cuts-australia-2026
Govern AI before it changes your workforce
A 30-minute briefing walks through the AI systems that make or shape decisions about people in your organisation, and what a record of those decisions should hold. Book a 30-minute briefing.
More research: Aegentra Reports, including the Aegentra Australian Cyber Risk Report 2026.