According to Fortune, JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon warned at the World Economic Forum in Davos that rushing AI-driven layoffs without safeguards could backfire and trigger “civil unrest.” He said he’d welcome government bans on mass AI replacement of workers to “save society,” and outlined plans to retrain, relocate, or provide income assistance for the bank’s 300,000-plus employees. Microsoft President Brad Smith, also in Davos, framed the future as a race where AI must be used to upgrade human capability. This comes as a Deloitte report shows companies have broadened worker access to AI by about 50% in a year, but insufficient worker skills are now the biggest barrier to integration, with fewer than half of firms making significant talent strategy changes.
Dimon’s dire warning
Here’s the thing: when the CEO of America’s largest bank starts talking about “civil unrest” stemming from technology adoption, you should probably listen. It’s a stark, almost shocking level of candor from the C-suite. Dimon isn’t some AI doomer on the fringe; he’s a pragmatic capitalist who sees the efficiency gains. But he’s also apparently looking out the window and seeing a potential social powder keg. His comment about welcoming government intervention is particularly telling. It’s basically an admission that the market, left to its own devices, might optimize for profit in a way that destabilizes the very society it operates in. That’s a huge concession.
The skills gap is the real problem
And this is where the Deloitte data hits home. The report, “State of AI in the Enterprise,” shows a glaring contradiction. Access to AI tools is exploding, but the talent strategy isn’t keeping pace. We’re giving people powerful new machinery but not the manual or the training. It’s like handing a race car to someone who only has a bicycle license and being surprised when they crash. Smith’s point about using AI to make humans better is the ideal, but it’s not automatic. It requires massive, intentional investment in continuous learning—the kind Dimon says he has a plan for. But how many companies actually do?
Adoption is slow and uneven
The Gallup report mentioned in the briefing adds another layer. Organizational adoption is basically flat. Only 38% of employees say their company has integrated AI. That number hasn’t budged. But *among* users, frequency is creeping up. So we have a tale of two workforces: a minority getting more AI-savvy by the day, and a majority still on the sidelines. This risks creating a brutal internal divide. The “haves” get more productive and secure; the “have-nots” get more anxious and vulnerable. That’s a terrible culture recipe.
So what’s the real agenda?
I think we have to be a little skeptical. Is this genuine humanism, or savvy risk management? For a bank like JPMorgan, civil unrest is bad for business. For Microsoft, selling AI as a human-augmentation tool is far better PR than selling it as a replacement engine. Their incentives align with a softer message. But honestly, the motive matters less than the action. If this rhetoric forces more CEOs to actually fund reskilling and think about transition plans, then it’s a win. The alternative—wholesale disruption without a net—seems to be what Dimon is genuinely afraid of. And if he’s afraid, maybe we all should be.
