The question of whether an employee’s promotion or bonus should hinge on their ability to utilize artificial intelligence is gaining urgency in corporate boardrooms. While major firms are increasingly tying performance metrics to AI adoption, many workers fear they are being incentivized to essentially automate their own replacement without receiving commensurate financial benefits.
Duncan Trevithick, a 34-year-old marketing professional in Spain who works for an AI training data company, describes a bonus scheme that rewards efficiency driven by AI tools. However, he notes that utilizing AI to complete two days’ worth of work each week does not result in additional paid time off or a proportional salary increase. Instead, the higher output simply becomes the new standard expectation.
“The uncomfortable interpretation is that employees are being assessed on how effectively they can participate in their own redundancy,” Trevithick said. “In the short term, that may help me get promoted. In the longer term, I have helped prove how much of my job no longer requires me.”
This sentiment reflects a broader trend where AI fluency is becoming a decisive factor in career progression. Accenture CEO Julie Sweet recently stated that AI proficiency is now integral to operating at the consultancy level, telling the Rapid Response podcast that employees must master these tools to earn promotions.
Major corporations, including Disney, Meta, JP Morgan, and KPMG, have reportedly introduced “AI leaderboards” to rank staff based on their engagement with large language models and other platforms. In a more drastic move, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong ordered the termination of engineers who failed to complete mandatory AI training.
The push for adoption comes despite a McKinsey report indicating that 94% of companies have yet to derive significant value from their AI investments. Nevertheless, the current labor market pressures employees to comply. With UK job vacancies hitting a five-year low, 75% of UK jobseekers surveyed by recruiter Gi Group in July indicated that requiring AI skills in performance reviews would not deter them from applying to an employer.
For Pamela, a senior US-based executive whose identity was withheld, the shift has created a “two-tier workforce.” She observes that AI capability now outweighs traditional experience, with less experienced but AI-fluent workers being preferred over veterans with decades of tenure. “AI fluency beats credentials every day,” she said, noting that those who do not visibly use AI face slower promotion timelines.
Legal experts suggest that while employers are within their rights to set such expectations, the approach raises questions regarding fairness. Tina Chander, a partner at Weightmans, highlighted that if an employee becomes more efficient due to AI, it is unclear whether they should be rewarded differently or if they are effectively making themselves redundant. She advised businesses to establish clear policies to avoid disputes, particularly as UK employment laws change in January 2027 to allow unfair dismissal claims after just six months of service.
HR consultant Tina Rahman criticized the lack of transparency from employers, arguing that companies are not sufficiently explaining the rationale behind AI mandates, which are often aimed at reducing costs and outsourcing.
Kamila Miller, an applied AI researcher at Henley Business School, warned that making AI usage a key performance indicator can lead to performative behavior rather than genuine productivity. She noted that employees may route unnecessary tasks through chatbots to meet metrics, resulting in obedience rather than improved judgment or decision-making.
In response to these concerns, some companies have retracted their mandates. Duolingo CEO Luis von Ahn announced in April that the firm would no longer include AI usage in performance reviews, opting instead to focus on overall job quality. Similarly, reports emerged in May that Amazon had shut down an internal AI leaderboard after employees were found gaming the system by assigning trivial tasks to AI.
Despite these high-profile reversals, many workers feel they must still demonstrate proficiency to secure their positions. Trevithick is attempting to future-proof his career by developing side projects and leveraging AI to own assets, rather than merely selling his labor. “If AI can do a job better than you can, it makes sense for the business to replace you,” he said. “It’s about how you can move into a position where you can leverage AI and benefit from it.”
Leave a Reply