New ruling: AI replacing jobs does not automatically mean workers can be fired

As artificial intelligence (AI) spreads across industries and takes on more roles, many employees may be concerned: Will AI replace my job, and will I get fired?

The Beijing Municipal Bureau of Human Resources and Social Security released a set of typical labor dispute cases for 2025 on Friday. Among them, one case involving AI replacing a job drew particular attention.

The case involved an employee surnamed Liu, who had worked for years at a tech company handling traditional manual data collection for mapping. In early 2024, the company decided to switch to AI-powered automated data collection, and Liu's department and corresponding position were eliminated. By the end of 2024, the company terminated his contract, citing "major changes in objective circumstances" that made it impossible to continue the employment contract.

Liu believed his dismissal was illegal and filed for arbitration.

The key issue was whether the company's decision to introduce AI to replace Liu's role constituted a "major change in objective circumstances" under the Labor Contract Law, which can allow employers to terminate contracts.

The arbitration committee explained that typical situations of "major changes in objective circumstances" include force majeure caused by natural disasters, and employers relocating, ceasing production or changing their production due to changes in laws, regulations and policies.

These situations are common in their uncontrollability and unpredictability, which exceed the scope of employers' routine business decisions and risk control. However, the tech company's decision to switch to AI was a business choice to stay competitive and wasn't an unexpected or uncontrollable event.

The company's termination of the employment contract was essentially shifting the risk of technological iteration to the employee, which was ruled illegal by the arbitration committee.

The ruling clarified that AI replacing a job does not constitute a significant change in objective circumstances, which not only protected Liu's legitimate rights and interests but also reassured the vast majority of workers.

It helps set a clear example for how AI-related job changes should be handled fairly, providing a reference for resolving labor disputes in the era of automation.

The arbitration committee also pointed out that companies, facing the rapid development of AI technologies, should prioritize properly resettling affected workers through measures such as negotiating changes to contracts, providing skills training, and switching roles within the company. If contract termination is necessary, companies should strictly follow relevant regulations and should not cite "major changes in objective circumstances" as an easy justification.