But whatever it was that cost Plumb his job, his skepticism about AI-driven job replacement is one shared by many economists.
"We just don't know," said Karan Girotra, a professor of management at Cornell University's business school. "Not because AI isn't great, but because it requires a lot of adjustment and most of the gains accrue to individual employees rather than to the organization. People save time and they get their work done earlier."
If an employer works faster because of AI, Girotra said it takes time to adjust a company's management structure in a way that would enable a smaller workforce. He's not convinced that's happening at Amazon, which he said is still scaling back from a glut of hiring during the COVID-19 pandemic.
A report by Goldman Sachs said AI's overall impact on the labor market remains limited, though some effects might be felt in "specific occupations like marketing, graphic design, customer service, and especially tech." Those are fields involving tasks that correlate with the strengths of the current crop of generative AI chatbots that can write emails and marketing pitches, produce synthetic images, answer questions and help write code.
But the bank's economic research division said in its most recent monthly AI adoption tracker that, since December, "very few employees were affected by corporate layoffs attributed to AI," though the report was published Jan. 16, before Amazon, Dow and Pinterest announced their layoffs.