Companies that have replaced employees with artificial intelligence are sometimes approaching those same workers to return, after discovering that automation has not removed the need for their expertise. The practice, described by talent assessment company SHL as “AI rebounding”, is emerging as a workforce challenge as organisations reassess the impact of their AI decisions.
SHL’s Talent Mobility at Work in 2026 report found that 13% of surveyed UK workers said they had personally experienced being replaced by AI and subsequently asked to return. The figure was 19% among US respondents and 24% among workers aged 18 to 24.
The research was based on an online survey of 2,036 employed adults in the UK and the US, conducted by Propeller Insights in June and July 2026. Read SHL’s Talent Mobility at Work in 2026 report.
Returning employees are seeking better terms
Workers who have experienced AI rebounding may be unwilling to return under their previous employment conditions. Among respondents asked about the terms they would expect before returning, 51% said they would want a substantial pay increase.
A further 42% wanted specific guarantees about future job security, while 40% sought full transparency about how AI would be used in their roles. Eight per cent said they would refuse to return regardless of the terms offered.
The findings suggest that employers may face additional costs and difficulties rebuilding trust when they reverse workforce decisions linked to automation.
SHL also found that 52% of respondents had encountered AI rebounding in some form, either personally, through someone they knew or by hearing about it. This broader figure does not represent the proportion who personally experienced job replacement and a subsequent request to return.
Lucy Beaumont, global senior vice president of product and design at SHL, said some organisations were making workforce decisions without a complete understanding of employees’ capabilities.
She said AI rebounding occurs when companies automate roles before properly assessing the human expertise within them, potentially leaving businesses to seek out the same employees again when gaps emerge.
Employers may be overlooking existing skills
The report also identified gaps in managers’ understanding of their employees' wider capabilities. Only 42% of respondents believed their managers fully understood the skills they could offer beyond their current job titles.
In the UK, that figure fell to 36%.
More than half of respondents, 54%, believed their employers favoured external recruitment over developing or promoting existing employees. Meanwhile, 47% said they would prefer retraining for another position rather than losing their jobs if AI substantially changed their current roles.
These findings point to a potential mismatch between employees' willingness to adapt and the opportunities employers provide. Workers may have transferable skills that are not reflected in their current job descriptions or recognised during workforce planning.
Younger workers report greater exposure
Younger employees reported higher levels of personal exposure to AI rebounding. Among respondents aged 18 to 24, 24% said they had experienced it themselves, while 36% said they knew someone who had.
The findings raise questions about how organisations are managing entry-level roles and early-career development as they introduce AI tools. If businesses remove positions without assessing the broader responsibilities and skills involved, they may later find that technology cannot fully meet their operational needs.
However, the survey reflects workers' reported experiences and perceptions. It does not independently verify individual redundancies, establish that AI directly caused every reported job loss, or provide a confirmed count of employees subsequently rehired.
For HR leaders, the findings underline the importance of understanding existing workforce capabilities before making automation and restructuring decisions. Assessing which tasks can be automated, which require human expertise and where employees can be redeployed may help organisations avoid costly reversals and maintain employee trust.
