Nine in 10 UK businesses regret redundancies due to AI

A survey of 600 UK HR professionals found that 91.6% regret redundancies made in the last 12 months, with 75% saying the cuts cost more than they saved. Many organizations rehired for eliminated roles within six months, and 54.6% cited automation requiring more human oversight than expected. The findings highlight that AI-driven restructures often fail to deliver promised efficiencies, leading to lost expertise and higher costs.

Nine in 10 UK businesses regret redundancies due to AI 75% say the cuts cost more than they saved A survey of 600 UK HR professionals who made redundancies in the last 12 months finds that 9 in 10 91.6% would approach those decisions differently if given the chance, new research has found. The data from Careerminds UK https://tracking.us.nylas.com/l/6da62fbe8ab347e4ab1df8265865286c/11/4223e475744ec49ce0675fc41a5b6981797b5b0d48e2a6d4ad17323a77847ba5?cache buster=1782374479 found that 75% say the cuts cost more than they saved. For all the confidence with which these decisions were made, only 8.4% of HR leaders say their AI-driven restructure delivered what was promised and would repeat the process unchanged. READ MORE: Peaky Blinders creator makes massive new 'world class' announcement for Birmingham That means nine in 10 would approach things differently if given the chance, with 41.2% saying they would overhaul their approach entirely, and a further 50.3% saying they would at least rethink which specific roles were cut. Half of HR leaders 52.1% said their organisation rehired for previously eliminated roles within just six months of making redundancies, while a further 17.8% had already begun rebuilding within three months. Only 2.1% of companies waited over a year. Many organisations discovered that the roles they had written off as replaceable were anything but. Nearly one in three 32.9% HR professionals said their organisation lost critical skills and expertise when employees were let go, and 28.1% said the remaining workforce lacked the skills to fill the knowledge gap left behind. Over half 54.6% of organisations shared their regret stemmed from automation needing significantly more human oversight than anticipated, meaning the efficiency gains that justified the cuts in the first place never fully materialised. Only 21.4% said AI fully replaced the roles with no operational issues, while 12.3% said the problems caused by the layoffs outweighed the ones they solved. When asked what would have helped, the top answers were a clearer understanding of what AI can actually do 53.8% , more data on employee skills 40.6% , and the ability to test workforce scenarios before committing to cuts 33% . The organisations that struggled most were making significant, irreversible decisions without the full picture and are now paying the price. Amanda Augustine, CPCC, Resident Careers Expert, Careerminds UK, said: "AI is a powerful tool, but it has never been a replacement for human judgement. "When businesses stripped out the people closest to the work, they didn't just lose headcount — they lost the context, the relationships, and the instinct that no algorithm can replicate. "The oversight burden that followed wasn't a surprise to the employees left behind. It was a surprise to the boardrooms that never asked them."