Artificial intelligence is accelerating change in the labour market, with the sharpest effects felt at the entry level. A Stanford University study found a 13 per cent fall in junior job listings over three years in roles most exposed to AI, disproportionately affecting younger workers. Research from Oxford Economics and Burning Glass Institute points to similar declines across customer service, accounting and administrative support.
AI is increasingly absorbing routine tasks once central to early-career jobs. That shift is leaving new graduates struggling to find footholds. A recent Wall Street Journal analysis showed higher unemployment among recent graduates compared to national averages, underscoring what Wharton’s Peter Cappelli calls the “experience trap”: employers demand skills and experience but provide fewer opportunities to gain them.
Yet AI’s rise is not only displacing tasks—it is also augmenting workers’ capabilities. A Gallup and Walton Family Foundation poll found teachers using AI tools saved time and improved lesson planning, while MIT economist David Autor describes AI as a “worker complementary technology” that helps people without advanced education take on more sophisticated work. This could democratise expertise, widening access to higher-value roles in healthcare, education and design.
The impact is spreading beyond junior levels. Industry data shows mid-level roles are increasingly exposed, adding urgency to reskilling and upskilling initiatives. Some employers are already redesigning entry-level roles to emphasise creativity and problem-solving, while others are expanding internships and apprenticeships to integrate learning with practical experience.
Apprenticeships in particular are being championed as a solution. By combining paid employment with skill development and mentorship, they offer a pathway to transform inexperience into expertise. Advocates such as Ryan Craig argue apprenticeships can rebuild career ladders for people from all socio-economic backgrounds, countering inequities created by unpaid internships and costly degrees.
Surveys of HR professionals suggest fears of wholesale job loss are overstated. Fewer than one in ten firms report full automation of junior roles, with many instead using AI to free early-career employees from repetitive work. This allows them to focus on higher-value tasks and develop skills in critical thinking, adaptability and communication.
For the UK, the challenge is to align AI adoption with inclusive workforce development. With investment in apprenticeships, thoughtful redesign of entry-level jobs and robust training, AI could enable a more dynamic and equitable labour market. Harnessed responsibly, it promises not just to replace early-career roles but to reinvent them for a new era of innovation and opportunity.
Created by Amplify: AI-augmented, human-curated content.
Noah Fact Check Pro
The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.
Freshness check
Score:
8
Notes:
The narrative presents recent studies and data, including a Stanford University study published on August 26, 2025, indicating a 13% drop in junior job listings over three years in AI-impacted fields. ([tomshardware.com](https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/ai-is-eating-entry-level-coding-and-customer-service-roles-according-to-a-new-stanford-study-junior-job-listings-drop-13-percent-in-three-years-in-fields-vulnerable-to-ai?utm_source=openai)) The article also references a New York Times piece highlighting challenges faced by recent computer science graduates, dated August 27, 2025. ([washingtonmonthly.com](https://washingtonmonthly.com/2025/08/27/ai-boon-for-jobs/?utm_source=openai)) While the content is current, some of the referenced studies and data points have been reported in other outlets, suggesting partial recycling of information. However, the inclusion of recent data and studies indicates a high freshness score. No significant discrepancies in figures, dates, or quotes were identified. The narrative does not appear to be based on a press release.
Quotes check
Score:
9
Notes:
Direct quotes from experts such as Peter Cappelli of the Wharton School and MIT economist David Autor are included. These quotes appear to be original to this narrative, with no identical matches found in earlier material. The wording of the quotes is consistent with their known public statements. No variations in quote wording were noted.
Source reliability
Score:
9
Notes:
The narrative originates from The Washington Monthly, a reputable publication known for its in-depth analysis and commentary. The article cites studies from Stanford University, Oxford Economics, and the Burning Glass Institute, all of which are credible sources. The inclusion of expert opinions from recognized authorities such as Peter Cappelli and David Autor further enhances the reliability of the information presented.
Plausability check
Score:
8
Notes:
The claims regarding AI's impact on entry-level jobs are supported by recent studies and expert opinions. The narrative aligns with findings from other reputable sources, such as a Stanford study indicating a 13% drop in junior job listings over three years in AI-impacted fields. ([tomshardware.com](https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/ai-is-eating-entry-level-coding-and-customer-service-roles-according-to-a-new-stanford-study-junior-job-listings-drop-13-percent-in-three-years-in-fields-vulnerable-to-ai?utm_source=openai)) The discussion on apprenticeships as a solution to the experience trap is consistent with current industry trends. The language and tone are appropriate for the topic and region, with no inconsistencies noted. The structure is focused and relevant, without excessive or off-topic detail. The tone is balanced and professional, resembling typical corporate or official language.
Overall assessment
Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): PASS
Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): HIGH
Summary:
The narrative presents current and relevant information from reputable sources, with original quotes and expert opinions. While some information has been reported elsewhere, the inclusion of recent data and studies indicates a high freshness score. The claims are plausible and supported by evidence, with no significant issues identified.