The daily publication · October 26, 2026 · Small business

Fired for AI, hired back at a premium

By Tabron Merryhill · The Workflow

Some owners are learning the same lesson twice. First they cut a role for AI. Then they call the person back, and pay more for the privilege.

The idea

SHL surveyed 2,036 employed adults in the US and UK in July 2026 for its Talent Mobility at Work in 2026 report. 16% say they were replaced by AI and later asked back by the same employer. The split is 19% in the US and 13% in the UK. Among workers aged 18 to 24, the figure is 24%.

SHL calls it AI rebounding. Employers automated first without fully understanding what the employee contributed. Only 24% of workers say their jobs are being redesigned around AI at all. And more than half say they know someone who was replaced by AI and later asked back.

The returning workers set terms. 51% want a significant raise. 42% want written job security guarantees. 40% want transparency about how AI is used. Lucy Beaumont, SHL senior vice president of product and design, puts it plainly: "Replacing people with AI saves on this year's cost base. Elevating people with AI is how you grow the business." She adds that trust is the real currency of the AI era.

The example

Picture a shop owner who cuts the person who answers the phone and handles reorders. The AI takes the calls. It sounds fine on paper.

Then the regulars notice. The AI does not know which customer always orders extra on Fridays. It mishandles the odd order that needs a judgment call. The supplier relationship goes quiet because nobody calls anymore. The owner calls the person back.

Now that person knows their worth. They ask for more pay and a written promise about their job. The owner pays it, because the gap cost more than the salary that was saved. That is the rebound, and it is the most expensive way to learn what a role really covered.

Here is the fair counterpoint, and it is a real one. Rebounding is the exception, not the reversal. Challenger, Gray and Christmas counted 120,136 announced US job cuts attributed to AI through September 2026, about 21% of all cuts and the leading stated reason year to date. Most cuts are not undone. A rebound story is not a safety net for a bad cut. And one more honest note: SHL sells talent assessment, so its survey serves its own business. Read the numbers as a vendor study with a point of view, not a neutral census.

The next step

Do not cut a role this week. Write down what it really covers first.

List everything that person does in a normal week, including the parts no job title captures. The regulars they know by name. The supplier they can call. The problem they quietly fix before you ever hear about it. Then ask the person what the job really covers. You will learn something the org chart does not say.

If AI takes the task, decide who owns the judgment around it before the cut, not after. That list is the difference between a cut you keep and a cut you buy back at a premium.

Want help mapping what a role really covers before you hand any of it to AI? A free 10-minute workflow conversation will map where the decisions sit and who signs off on them. No pitch, just the map.

Sources: SHL, https://www.shl.com/about/news-and-events/press-releases/the-skills-youre-trying-to-hire-for-might-already-be-on-your-payroll/; SHL, https://www.shl.com/assets/premium-content/talent-mobility-at-work-in-2026-report-en-v2.pdf; Automation Magazine, https://www.automationmagazine.co.uk/the-skills-youre-trying-to-hire-for-might-already-be-on-your-payroll/; Business Wire, https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20261015279775/en/The-Skills-Youre-Trying-to-Hire-For-Might-Already-Be-on-Your-Payroll. Opposing view: Fast Company, https://www.fastcompany.com/91616653/tech-layoffs-165925-jobs-slashed-2026-september-cuts-rise.