It's not AI, it's us.

Every day, headlines and sweeping statements about artificial intelligence and work circulate, fueling collective anxiety: that AI will destroy millions of jobs, that it will replace people, that it will end up controlling us, or that it is a threat to society. These are expressions of a diffuse, often irrational fear, characteristic of what psychology identifies as confusional anxieties: when the risk is not well defined, the fear is magnified. The only way to reduce this anxiety is to confront it with data and sound judgment, distinguishing what is true and what is not regarding the real impact of AI on the world of work.

Initial evidence can be seen in the most technologically advanced countries with high levels of automation, such as Japan and Germany. Contrary to the catastrophic narrative, these are economies with very low unemployment rates. At the end of last year, unemployment in Catalonia stood at 8.18%, more than double that of Germany (3.8%) and more than triple that of Japan (2.6%). If technology were to destroy jobs on a massive scale, these figures should tell a different story. In a conversation with Japanese experts, they explained that AI doesn't generate fear there because the population's level of education is very high. The key isn't rejecting technology, but rather human capital.

Furthermore, current data indicates that AI is, for the moment, creating more jobs than it eliminates. According to the World Economic Forum, AI will continue to generate net employment until at least 2027. Let's consider, for example, a Catalan industrial SME that two years ago incorporated AI systems to optimize production planning. The result wasn't mass layoffs, but quite the opposite: fewer errors, more orders, and a need for new profiles—data analysts, advanced maintenance technicians—that didn't exist before. The real problem, therefore, isn't job destruction, but a lack of preparedness. In our country, 50% of AI-related job openings remained unfilled in 2023. There are not enough qualified professionals. The same report indicates that six out of ten people will need training before 2030 if they want to remain competitive in the job market. Therefore, the equation is clear: the problem is not so much AI destroying jobs as the lack of adequate training. Training becomes the decisive factor in the future of work.

Research also does not support an accelerated loss of jobs in professions highly exposed to AI, such as financial advising, manufacturing, translation, and surgery. Researcher Marta Peirano illustrated this with a compelling example: AI applied to diagnostic imaging has not made radiologists disappear; on the contrary, it has increased their demand. Machines process data, but people interpret, contextualize, name problems, anticipate risks, and make decisions. Diagnosis can be partially automated; care cannot. AI facilitates professional work, but it does not replace it.

However, not everyone starts from the same point. Women, older people, and people with disabilities may be more affected if the digital divide widens. To avoid this, strict monitoring of algorithms will be necessary, as well as preventing biases based on gender, origin, and age, and promoting active digital inclusion policies. Paradoxically, AI itself can be a key ally, enabling the design of personalized learning pathways, especially useful for reducing these inequalities.

Hence the urgent need for a massive strategy of reskilling and upskillingWorkers will need to be retrained, and businesses, universities, vocational training centers, and government agencies will need to be effectively connected, aligning educational offerings with the real needs of the labor market.

The ultimate goal must be to combine the productivity gains that AI will bring with a tangible improvement in working conditions. This necessitates an urgent social agreement on how to distribute the profits derived from technological productivity.

Viewing AI solely through the lens of fear is a strategic error. If we focus exclusively on the risks, we fall into a social and political fatalism that erodes collective self-esteem, paralyzes action, and has consequences for mental health. The key will be training, the regulation of AI, and, above all, putting it to work in our favor. The future of work will not be decided by any AI, but by how we choose to coexist with it and guide it to serve well-being, dignity, and the meaning of what we do.