Erik Brynjolfsson has spent the final a number of years constructing one of the vital detailed empirical footage of how know-how is reshaping the American workforce—and the image retains getting darker for staff on the backside of the company ladder.
Final August, the Stanford economist, who has been a thought chief on synthetic intelligence (AI) for years, made headlines when he and his crew printed a first-of-its-kind examine revealing the AI revolution was already having a “significant and disproportionate impact on entry-level workers in the U.S. labor market,” notably younger individuals ages 22 to 25 in white-collar fields like software program engineering and customer support.
Now, in a brand new working paper printed by way of the Nationwide Bureau of Financial Analysis this February, Brynjolfsson and a crew of co-authors have skilled their lens on blue-collar America—and located minimal wage will increase are accelerating the adoption of business robots on manufacturing facility flooring.
Taken collectively, the 2 papers hint the outlines of a labor market transformation that’s squeezing staff from each ends: AI encroaching from the highest, automation transferring in from the underside.
The white-collar warning shot
The August 2025 examine was constructed on an unusually highly effective dataset—high-frequency payroll data from hundreds of thousands of American staff generated by ADP, the most important payroll software program agency within the nation. What Brynjolfsson and his co-authors discovered was hanging: Because the widespread adoption of generative AI instruments starting in late 2022, employment for early-career staff in essentially the most AI-exposed occupations fell by 13% on a relative foundation, even after controlling for broader firm-level disruptions. Older, extra skilled staff in the identical fields, in the meantime, noticed their employment maintain regular or develop.
The brand new examine, co-authored with J. Frank Li of the College of British Columbia, Javier Miranda of Germany’s Halle Institute for Financial Analysis, Robert Seamans of NYU’s Stern College of Enterprise, and Andrew J. Wang of Stanford, turns from algorithm to meeting line. Utilizing confidential U.S. Census Bureau microdata linked to customs import data, the crew tracked industrial robotic adoption amongst roughly 240,000 single-unit U.S. manufacturing companies from 1992 to 2021—figuring out robotic adopters by the second they started importing machines from abroad suppliers in Japan, Germany, and Switzerland.
The central discovering is exact and constant: A ten% improve within the minimal wage is related to an roughly 8% improve within the chance a producing agency will undertake industrial robots, relative to the typical adoption fee within the pattern.
“Firms subject to higher minimum wages are more likely to adopt robots,” the authors wrote, “even after controlling for observable firm and local economic characteristics.”
The logic mirrors the white-collar story, even when the mechanism is totally different, with the authors arguing these results are “economically meaningful.” Simply as AI turns into economically engaging when it could exchange the codified work of a junior software program engineer or customer support rep, an industrial robotic turns into extra engaging when the price of the human doing repetitive meeting or welding goes up. In each circumstances, a rising worth for labor on the decrease finish of the ability spectrum tilts the calculus towards machines.
“While robots may enhance productivity,” Brynjolfsson and his authors wrote, “they may also alter the structure of employment, especially in low-wage sectors as typically found in manufacturing.”
A rigorous check
The manufacturing examine’s most compelling proof comes from a geographic quasi-experiment. Relatively than merely evaluating companies in high-wage states to these in low-wage states—an strategy weak to the objection that these states differ in numerous different methods—the researchers centered particularly on corporations positioned in counties that sit immediately on state borders, evaluating companies on reverse sides of the identical line. These companies face practically similar native economies, labor markets, and industries. The one significant distinction is which state’s minimal wage regulation applies to them.
Beneath this stringent border-pair check, a ten% minimal wage improve was nonetheless related to an 8.4% rise in robotic adoption—a determine that held up throughout a number of regression specs and intently matched the broader mixture evaluation the crew carried out on the state stage. The impact was sturdy to controls for agency measurement, age, trade, and whether or not a state had right-to-work legal guidelines on the books.
A sample throughout borders
The discovering just isn’t distinctive to the U.S. A examine of Turkey discovered a pointy 33.5% minimal wage hike in 2016 drove medium and enormous companies to extend robotic use, notably in industries heavy with blue-collar, routine-task staff.
Analysis in China discovered related dynamics from 2008 to 2012, with a ten% minimal wage improve elevating the chance of robotic adoption, with stronger results at high-productivity and private-sector companies.
German researchers analyzing the nation’s minimal wage introduction in 2015 discovered crops with excessive shares of easy guide staff in routine duties had been the most probably to reply by adopting robots.
The coverage stress
Brynjolfsson and his co-authors had been measured of their conclusions, appropriately for a non-peer reviewed working paper. The manufacturing paper doesn’t try and measure downstream employment results—whether or not staff displaced by robots discover new jobs, or at what wages—and the authors acknowledge robotic adoption can generally correlate with increased firm-level productiveness and even employment development, as some worldwide firm-level analysis has discovered.
However on the central coverage query—whether or not minimal wage will increase drive automation—the proof is now laborious to dismiss. And given Brynjolfsson’s August discovering AI is concurrently eroding the entry-level white-collar labor market, policymakers face a compounding problem: two distinct applied sciences, encroaching on two distinct segments of the workforce, by way of two distinct mechanisms, on the identical time.
“Policymakers may wish to consider complementary strategies to mitigate potential displacement effects,” the authors wrote, “such as retraining programs or targeted support for small firms” a prescription that, in gentle of the parallel AI findings, could also be arriving in well timed style.
For this story, Fortune journalists used generative AI as a analysis software. An editor verified the accuracy of the data earlier than publishing.
