Disney reportedly weighs cutting thousands of jobs, AI among the pressures

20% cost savings asked of some managers

Disney could cut thousands of jobs, and some managers were asked to find annual cost savings of 20%, according to a BeInCrypto rewrite of a Bloomberg report that cites people familiar with the matter. Reuters is quoted listing AI among the pressures on Disney, alongside weaker box office, streaming competition and slower park attendance. Disney has not commented, the article says, and it does not give an exact number of jobs, the affected divisions or whether AI is a stated reason. Earlier rounds this year included about 1,000 jobs in April.

Alan's takeDisney’s pressures include weaker box office, streaming competition, and slower park attendance. But AI now shows up on the list as well, which raises a harder question than cost cutting. If competitors can use AI to make content, run marketing, or serve customers at a fraction of our cost, what happens to the advantages we’ve spent decades building? For business leaders, the question isn’t how AI lets us cut. It’s how AI will disrupt our industry.

Full detail

Gartner forecasts 30% of AI-driven layoffs will be rehired by 2029, at higher cost

30% of AI-replaced employees Gartner expects rehired by 2029

Gartner predicts that by 2029, 30% of employees laid off because AI replaced their work will need to be rehired, often at a significantly higher cost. The forecast is in Gartner's September 2026 future-of-work release, and IT Pro covered it on November 2. Gartner analyst Caitlyn McDonough told IT Pro that organizations often decide how many people to let go before they understand what it will take to get work done. IT Pro reports that only 19% of firms say they have practices for aligning talent strategy with how work is changing. Gartner gives no sample or method for the forecast.

Alan's takeMost layoffs start with a number: how deep do we need to cut to make the quarter work? Then AI gets named as the reason, because it can theoretically pick up the slack for those who remain. Gartner’s 30% rehire forecast is the result of this approach. It is better to starts with the work, not the headcount. Which tasks can AI perform with low risk to the organization, and which tasks depend on the judgment and institutional knowledge that we can’t easily buy back?

Apple's chief executive says the company will not ship AI for its own sake

Apple chief executive John Ternus, who took over from Tim Cook on September 1, told Wired in an interview published October 30 that Apple does not want to ship AI for AI's sake, and that when it is done right people should not have to think about whether AI or traditional software made something happen. Startup Fortune, which reported the remarks, set them against a sell-off in AI stocks.

Alan's takeRefusing to ship AI for AI’s sake is good advice for any business. It's also exactly what you'd say if your AI story wasn't ready. Ternus has been saying it since April, while Siri still runs on Google's models. Of course we can't count Apple out, but is Apple disciplined or falling further behind? For the rest of us, the test is the same: can we name the specific experience AI makes better, or are we still trying to find one?

AI saves time and costs time, at the same time

76% of AI users say it saves them an hour or more per week

Hubstaff, a time tracking company, surveyed 1,068 full-time US workers in computer-based roles in October. It reports that 79% use AI at work, 76% of those who could estimate say it saves at least an hour a week, and 46% say their expected workload has increased since adopting it. Asked what they do with saved time, 39% of AI users say they finish earlier and 26% take on more work. Hubstaff says 45% spend an hour or more a week correcting colleagues' AI-generated work. The survey is commissioned by the vendor and unweighted.

Alan's takeIf 45% of workers spend an hour a week fixing colleagues’ AI output, whose time are we saving? Not the people doing the fixing. People can only correct AI work if they know what right looks like, which means the cleanup lands on our most experienced people. Widespread AI use may help our least experienced people, but it quietly turns our experts into editors of everyone else’s work. We need to amplify our experts, not bury them.

Nearly one in five surveyed US workers cut for AI say they were asked back.

1 in 5 US workers replaced by AI later asked to return

SHL, a talent management company, reports that nearly one in five US workers it surveyed said they were laid off or replaced by AI and were later asked to return to their previous employer. The research, fielded by Propeller Insights in June and July among more than 1,000 workers each in the US and UK, also found nearly half would need a significant pay rise to go back and 43% would want written job security guarantees. SHL's Lucy Beaumont says companies "pulled the plug too quickly". The article does not say which roles or employers were involved.

Alan's takeAI typically disrupts tasks, not entire roles. Full replacement requires role distillation.

Full detail

American Express will cut about 5 percent of jobs, then automate

5% of managers laid off at Amex. The company thinks AI fills the gap

American Express said on October 23, 2026, on its third-quarter earnings call, that it will cut about 5% of positions worldwide and take a $336 million restructuring charge. Executives said the company will remove management layers and widen managers' spans of control so that it can automate and use AI in the coming quarters. Chief financial officer Christophe Le Caillec told CNBC that processes should be well structured before they are automated. Amex raised its full-year profit forecast the same day. It has not said which teams or roles are affected, or which tasks AI will take over.

Alan's takeAmex says it has to fix the organization before it automates. But removing layers isn’t the same as redesigning the work. Those who remain will inherit the coordination their former peers handled, before AI is ready to help. If we flatten first and figure out the AI later, we’re betting our best managers can absorb the gap. The message to managers is clear: start automating your own work before your company decides it can do without you.

Full detail

Eric Schmidt says a firm of 10,000 could cut a couple thousand people

20% of knowledge workers could be cut

Former Google chief executive Eric Schmidt said on the In Good Company podcast, in remarks first reported on October 21, 2026, that AI platforms can remove much of the coordination tax large organizations pay, the time spent in meetings and aligning teams. He recalled that his job at Google was 12 hours of meetings a day. He guessed that a company of 10,000 people has a couple of thousand it does not need, and described a friend who cut a fifth of his staff, including what Schmidt called 'glue people' who plan and coordinate across teams. He said invention, sales and leadership remain.

Alan's takeSchmidt has wanted to get rid of 'glue people' since at least 2015, long before AI gave him a reason. But coordination isn't a job category; it's part of every knowledge worker's job. Spreadsheets didn't remove the math people, they moved the math into everyone's work and changed what analysts do. Yes, AI can eliminate many coordination hours. But cutting people without first distilling their jobs, separating the judgment from the routine, will cut the judgment too. It’s also worth knowing that Schmidt owns about 1% of Anthropic, so weigh his case against 'glue people' accordingly.

Full detail

Microsoft offered voluntary exits to about 60,000 employees

60,000 Microsoft employees offered separation package

Microsoft offered voluntary exit packages to about 60,000 employees, roughly a quarter of its workforce, on October 26, 2026. Chief people officer Amy Coleman announced the Voluntary Exit Offer, open to employees at level 70 and below on participating teams in the United States, Canada, India and the United Kingdom. TechCrunch, citing Bloomberg, reports that Xbox, Windows, Copilot and Finance take part. Coleman called the offer new for Microsoft and said the company will learn from it. The reporting does not say how many will accept or whether layoffs will follow.

Alan's takeAI impacts tasks not full jobs. Each employee decides whether to leave. When an employee accepts, the tasks in that role move to AI, move to colleagues, or stop, and the offer by itself does not say which.

Full detail

Most surveyed managers say AI makes employees' work harder to judge

TechCrunch reported on October 21, 2026 a survey that monday.com commissioned from Nielsen, covering 1,701 directors and senior managers in seven countries. More than half say AI has made it harder to judge what their employees contributed themselves, because polished AI-assisted output hides how much came from the person. Nearly half spend more time reviewing and guiding team output. Most have changed how they evaluate staff. The survey is vendor-commissioned and records what managers perceive, not output or quality.

Alan's takeWe have always built proficiency the same way: by struggling with the material. Now AI lets us skip the struggle. So how does anyone become proficient, and how do we know when they are? Managers are already adjusting, and 78% now weigh skills like prompting and deciding what to delegate. Those matter, but they measure how well someone uses the tool, not whether they understand the work. And when we can’t tell? We ask AI. Already, 39% of managers use it to draft performance reviews. The next step is using AI to assess our people’s proficiency. I’ve tried it, and it’s surprisingly good. Yes, I just came full circle. When it comes to assessing our people, AI is both the problem and the answer.