The corporate world is often a theater of euphemisms. We talk about "restructuring" instead of layoffs, "synergies" instead of mergers, and "resource optimization" when what we really mean is that we're going to do more with fewer people. That's why, when the CEO of one of the largest companies on the planet speaks with almost brutal clarity, we need to pay attention. Andy Jassy, CEO of Amazon, has done just that.
His message is unequivocal: Generative Artificial Intelligence is not just another tool; it's the company's new operating system, and its comprehensive implementation will be a game-changer for its 1.5 million employees.
The message without anesthesia. In his recent letter to shareholders, Jassy didn't sweeten the words. He declared his commitment to using AI in every corner of the business, from logistics and customer experience to programming and internal management. The business logic is as simple as it is implacable: for a company of Amazon's scale, the greatest lever for immediately improving financial results is efficiency, and the largest operating cost is, without a doubt, labor.
Jassy doesn't euphemize words. He understands that AI is a fundamental tool for eliminating costs and has laid out, with almost disarming honesty, that in a few years, many jobs as we know them today will no longer be necessary. This frankness, although uncomfortable, is welcome. At least, workers at Amazon and the rest of the tech sector know what to expect. The warning has been given, and there is no room for interpretation.
The paradox seems to be "every man for himself." And this is where Jassy's strategy becomes fascinating. Far from hiding AI from his employees, he has done something that at first glance seems like a contradiction: he has encouraged the entire workforce to make full use of AI tools to be more productive. From developers using CodeWhisperer (their coding assistant) to marketing teams creating campaigns with generative AI.
But make no mistake, this isn't a simple training program. It's a profoundly powerful subliminal message: it's pitted them against each other. The implicit directive is: "Adapt, master this technology, integrate it into your daily work, and prove that you are more valuable with it than without it." Those who succeed, the most "prepared" or proactive, will be better able to defend their jobs. Those who don't will be left behind. It's a form of natural selection at the corporate level, where the company wins twice: either it obtains ultra-efficient employees who have integrated AI, or it easily identifies those that AI itself can replace.
And this, my dear friends, is a tidal wave that engulfs everything. The most common mistake is to think that this only affects warehouse workers, replaced by increasingly sophisticated robots. As experts like Mustafa Suleyman (CEO of Microsoft AI) warn, this technology is "different." It automates not only physical and repetitive tasks, but also cognitive tasks.
AI is already writing reports, analyzing financial data, writing code, designing advertising campaigns, and even making management decisions. This means that the tide will not stop at the base of the pyramid. It affects white-collar workers, middle managers whose job is to supervise and coordinate, and even senior managers. No one is immune to its reach. Perhaps, and just perhaps, the only individual defense strategy is the one Jassy proposes: know your enemy, turn it into an ally, and use it to try to become more or less indispensable.
Let's be clear: the promise that AI will democratize opportunity is, to a large extent, a fallacy. While an individual can access powerful tools, the true benefit materializes on a massive scale. AI will disproportionately benefit the most powerful. AI will be a power multiplier.
A corporation like Amazon can invest billions in developing or implementing cutting-edge AI systems. That investment translates into exponential savings in labor costs, achieving efficiencies that a small or medium-sized business could never achieve. Capital is converted into technology, and technology eliminates the need for some human labor, generating even more capital for its owners. It's a virtuous cycle for shareholders and a vicious cycle for the labor market.
Injustice, as always, depends not on technology, but on how humans decide to use it. AI has no morals; we do. When a few years ago some figures floated the idea of imposing a "robot tax," many thought it was science fiction. Today, perhaps it's time to seriously consider something similar for AI.
If a company replaces 1,000 workers (who paid income tax, contributed to social security, and consumed within the local economy) with an AI system, society loses that income. An "AI tax" could tax the productivity generated by these systems to offset that loss and fund the transition: massive reskilling programs, a stronger social safety net, or even exploring a Universal Basic Income.
The fundamental question that Amazon's honesty leaves us with is: how are we going to defend people's dignity and their right to decent, paid work in this new era? It's a question that becomes more and more difficult to answer every day.
But at least, thanks to this "chronicle of a replacement foretold," we can no longer afford not to think about it. The debate is on, and it is one of the most important of our time.
EN 
ES