The U.S. labor market added 178,000 jobs in March, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Summary
- Job growth in March remained modest, while technology hiring remained weak and entry-level positions continued to shrink.
- AI use increased in offices, but many workers reported rework, frustration and lower confidence.
- Executives saw benefits from AI tools, while staff faced errors and additional controls on a daily basis.
the data presented limited changes from the previous month, even as companies continued to talk about AI-driven growth and improved workplace efficiency.
That gap has kept the focus on whether AI is getting better hiring and production as promised. Recent labor, employment and industry reports show a more mixed picture, especially in technology and entry-level positions.
Most of the job growth in March came from health care, construction, transportation and warehousing, and social assistance. Health care added 76,000 jobs, while construction gained 26,000 and transportation and warehousing added 21,000.
The BLS data did not show the same strength in areas linked to technology. IT infrastructure providers and web search portals showed little movement, while IT systems design and related services lost 13,000 jobs during the month.
That pattern contrasts with public claims that tech hiring is rebounding. Marc Andreessen saying Fears about job losses caused by AI were exaggerated, with data shared showing more job openings at tech companies.
But vacancies don’t always lead to hiring. Labor figures for March showed that the strongest hiring came from sectors outside the technology core, while related digital services were stable or down.
A recent Goldman Sachs reportQuoted by Fortune, he said AI eliminated about 16,000 jobs per month over the past year. At the same time, a 2025 SignalFire study said hiring of new graduates had abandonment 50% of the levels observed before the COVID-19 pandemic.
SignalFire said: “The door to technology was once wide open for new graduates. Today, it’s barely open.” The report linked that shift to smaller funding rounds, more agile teams, fewer graduate programs and greater use of AI.
So Goldman Sachs warned that workers displaced by technology often move into more routine jobs. The report says this change can reduce the value of your existing skills and weaken job outcomes for years.
That concern has expanded the debate about AI and jobs. While some leaders still expect long-term gains, recent data has drawn attention to current hiring patterns and who bears the cost of change.
Worker experience does not match executive optimism
Executives continue to report strong support for artificial intelligence tools. Harvard Business Review said that 80% of leaders use AI weekly, while 74% reported positive returns from first implementations.
Workers reported a different experience. Mercer saying 43% of workers found their work most frustrating, while Workday said almost four hours are lost fixing AI production for every 10 hours of efficiency gains reported.
Harvard Business Review too pointed to “work,” described as content that appears polished but lacks substance. Researchers said 41% of workers had seen these types of results, and each case added almost two hours of rework.
Workday said only 14% of respondents “consistently achieve net positive results from using AI.” That result suggests that many workplaces still face errors, additional reviews and little confidence in the results.
OpenAI warns that politics may lag behind change
The divide between executive use and daily staff experience may be due to how teams use the tools. Harvard Business Review said top managers often apply AI to strategy, writing and synthesis, where systems tend to work best.
For routine operations that need constant precision, the results seem less reliable. Brian Solis of ServiceNow called This burden is a “tax on AI,” which he described as “More controls. More rework. More anxiety.”
OpenAI also has admitted that AI is changing employment. His policy ideas included broader health coverage, support for retirement savings, and a new industrial agenda.
The company said its proposals are early and intended to start discussion. He also warned: “Unless policies keep pace with technological change, the institutions and safety nets needed to navigate this transition could be left behind.”
