'Migrants Won't Take Your Job — AI Will': Experts Warn Millions Of Brits Face Automation Threat

While politicians rail against small boats and visa quotas, another force is transforming Britain's job market — and it doesn't need a passport.

Experts warn that artificial intelligence (AI), not immigration, poses the greatest threat to millions of UK workers, as automation advances more rapidly than regulations can keep pace.

A new US Senate study released in October found that up to 97 million American jobs could be displaced by artificial intelligence and automation within the next decade. Ironically, parts of the report were written using ChatGPT, the very technology it warns about. Administrative assistants, accountants, and customer service representatives were identified as being at the highest risk.

AI, Not Immigration, Is Reshaping Work

In the UK, similar anxieties are spreading. A Trades Union Congress poll found that half of British adults fear AI will take or significantly alter their work, a figure that rises to 62 per cent among 25- to 34-year-olds. The union warned that, without stronger regulation and worker involvement, AI could deepen inequality and erode job quality.

Further evidence from Acas and YouGov found that one in four UK workers already worry they'll lose their jobs to AI. Even within the technology sector, which should benefit from automation, 52 per cent of professionals say they fear replacement by the very systems they help build.

The government's Impact of AI on UK Jobs and Training Report (2024) projects that 10 to 30 per cent of British jobs are 'potentially automatable' as AI grows more capable.

The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology, citing PwC analysis, estimates that around 18 per cent of UK roles will be at high risk of automation by 2035. More recent academic work, including the Generative AI Susceptibility Index (GAISI), suggests that nearly every job now involves at least some exposure to AI-driven disruption, from copywriting to customer support.

Yet public debate has barely shifted. Instead, it keeps circling back to immigration — as if the biggest threat to employment were arriving by dinghy, not download. In truth, migrants typically fill roles in social care, construction, cleaning, and hospitality — jobs that rely on physical presence, manual skill, or empathy. These are precisely the traits automation struggles to replicate. The nurse, builder, or barista isn't being replaced by a robot any time soon. However, the call centre agent or payroll clerk might be.

The Real Threat Isn't Coming by Boat

Despite this data, political rhetoric continues to frame immigration as the main threat to employment. But the reality is starkly different. Migrants typically fill in-person, manual, or care-based roles in sectors such as construction, healthcare, and hospitality — areas where automation remains inefficient.

By contrast, AI targets the middle-class, desk-based jobs that once felt secure. As one Oxford economist put it, 'The robot isn't replacing the builder. It's replacing the bookkeeper.'

Economic analysts describe this imbalance as the 'automation trap' — productivity rises, but spending power collapses when machines replace humans. Unlike migrants, AI pays no taxes, rents no homes, and buys no groceries.

A Tectonic Shift in the UK Labour Market

The Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology warns that without intervention, the UK could see a widening gap between high-tech employers and displaced workers. Experts recommend mandatory AI impact assessments, expanded reskilling programmes, and profit-sharing incentives to ensure automation benefits workers, not just shareholders.

Yet, public conversation remains stuck in the past. Politicians continue chasing immigration soundbites while ignoring the technology quietly rewriting the nation's employment map.

As automation encroaches on everything from copywriting to payroll, the debate over who's 'taking British jobs' misses the point entirely. The threat isn't human — it's digital.

The Choice Ahead

Britain stands at a crossroads. AI can either empower workers or render them obsolete. Treating it as a collective tool — through training, transparency, and fair policy — could boost productivity without sacrificing livelihoods.

Blaming migrants might still win headlines, but it won't stop automation. The question for Britain isn't whether AI will change work — it's who will still have one when it does.

Britain faces a clear choice. It can treat AI as a public tool to enhance jobs and productivity, or let it quietly hollow them out. Blaming migrants may still win easy headlines, but it won't save anyone's career.

The future of work in the UK is being rewritten not by those crossing borders, but by those writing code. The question is no longer whether AI will change the nature of employment. It's who will still be employed when it does.