3 ms·

Salesforce CEO confirms 4,000 layoffs ‘because I need less heads’ with AI - https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/02/salesforce-ceo-confirms-4000-layoffs-because-i-need-

by dfxm12 1y ago

Salesforce CEO confirms 4,000 layoffs ‘because I need less heads’ with AI - https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/02/salesforce-ceo-confirms-4000-layoffs-because-i-need-less-heads-with-ai.html https://www.cnbc.com/2025/09/02/salesforce-ceo-confirms-4000...

lernedsomecode 1y ago
this stuff is all a cover from CEOs. We're in the middle of a downturn and they're pretending layoffs like this are due to AI so as not to spook investors.
halfmatthalfcat 1y ago
You have to trust they are actually telling the truth and not using it as a convenient scapegoat. What sounds better to shareholders “we’re replacing jobs with AI” or “we hired too many during the COVID hiring glut and need to lay more people off”?
- GoatInGrey 1y ago
  But what if I want the option that validates my untreated anxiety?
mattacular 1y ago
Does anybody really believe that SalesForce of all companies has successfully replaced 4000 real and necessary jobs with AI? Or is that more likely just an excuse to justify more layoffs in the tech industry for the usual reasons.
- jlarocco 1y ago
  It would be some kind of securities fraud for their CEO to say it to the media if it weren't at least partially true.
  - franktankbank 1y ago
    Doesn't have to be true, just needs to be unfalsifiable.
- 93po 1y ago
  It's less about justifying layouts and more PR: Salesforce is trying to sell AI products and they're marketing how good they are at AI by saying they removed 4k jobs with it
- api 1y ago
  Lots of companies using AI or RTO as excuses to just downsize since layoffs for normal reasons don’t look as good.
  - adabyron 1y ago
    I really wish journalists & public speaking investors would call this out more. Though like non-GAAP earnings & adjusted EBITDA, very few care. Those that do are often old, technical, conservative & silent type of investors instead of podcasters or CNBC guests. RIP Charlie M.
  - eastbound 1y ago
    Very probable those CEOs use AI to write the speech, asking “What’s the least antagonizing way of explaining the layoffs?”.
  - nilkn 1y ago
    There's no doubt it can function as a convenient cover, but that doesn't mean it's having no effect at all. It would be naive to assume that the introduction of a fundamentally new general-purpose work tool across millions of workers in nearly every industry and company within the span of a couple years has not played any role whatsoever in making teams and organizations more efficient in terms of headcount.
- techpineapple 1y ago
  They did say this was specifically in customer service, which if there was a department I believe you might be replaced by AI this would be it; Alternatively though if the market is bad and there not launching as many new products or appealing to as many new customers, customer support may be a cost center you’d force to have “AI efficiencies”
- dathinab 1y ago
  tbh. for companies like SalesForce I always assume they have a lot of bloated unnecessary jobs which are done well enough by the people having them to needing a external reason to firing them in addition SalesForce grew in employment size in 2025 AFIK and 4000 jobs are for them only around ~~5%, which means it's to small to be a meaningful metric if you don't fully trust what their press department does (and you shouldn't) still I see people using modern AI for small productivity boosts all over the place including private live (and often with a wastely underestimate risk assessment) so in the best case it's only good enough to let people process more of the backlog (which otherwise would be discarded due to time pressure but isn't worthless) and in the worst case will lead to idk. 1/3 of people in many areas losing their job. But that is _without_ major breakthrough in AI, just based one better applying what AI already can do now :/ (and is excluding mostly physical jobs, but it's worse for some other jobs, like low skill graphic design positions)
  - threetonesun 1y ago
    During the just-post-pandemic hiring spree I remember talking to some software developers who were doing very light coding in what I would usually think was a business analyst role. Those roles were both bloat that was lost once free money stopped flowing, and easily replaced (or reduced) with AI. And as software developers, it would be silly if we didn't think that businesses would love to find a way to replace us, as the software we have created did for other roles for the past 60 years.
mikelitoris 1y ago
I am sure he has had plenty of "heads" as a bigwig CEO. Also, it's "fewer" heads not "less".
adabyron 1y ago
Those 4,000 were "customer support" positions & Salesforce just happens to also sell an AI product for customer support. They also underperformed expectations in their last earnings. Companies like IBM & Klarna have made news for reducing positions like these & then re-hiring them. AI, like most tech, will increase productivity & reduce headcount but it's not there yet. Remember, the days are long & the years are short.
- gamblor956 1y ago
  This. Customer support is the "big" thing for AI replacement but it's also the worst role to replace with an AI, since customer frustration can (and usually does) lead to spurned customers switching to competitors. Salesforce fired 4000 humans and replaced them with a dumb chatbot that couldn't answer many questions beyond the very basic. Customers absolutely hated the chatbot and started rethinking their Salesforce spend, resulting in a number of customers reducing their spend or switching to another CRM provider entirely.
  - rkomorn 1y ago
    > but it's also the worst role to replace with an AI, since customer frustration can (and usually does) lead to spurned customers switching to competitors Unless all the competitors are also going the AI route for support, because they're all equally greedy. That's basically what happened with the path from humans answering the phone to "press 1 to..." to "say 1 to...", or website chat support being replaced by non-AI bots. I really can't see an argument against the notion that customer service has been steadily worsening as a result of companies preferring to invest less on labor.
ofjcihen 1y ago
Salesforces CEO needs to consider replacing them with security product architects so they can figure out a way to send me logs that aren’t crap
SoftTalker 1y ago
Wait until his customers figure out that they don't need Salesforce anymore.
Ianjit 1y ago
CRM needs to convince the markets that it isn't an AI loser. By saying it has been able to use AI to automate internally CRM is hoping the market will believe that its AI is good enough to also sell to customers. Unfortunately for CRM, after the earnings print the market still thought it was an AI loser.

by dfxm12 1y ago

lernedsomecode 1y ago

this stuff is all a cover from CEOs. We're in the middle of a downturn and they're pretending layoffs like this are due to AI so as not to spook investors.

halfmatthalfcat 1y ago

You have to trust they are actually telling the truth and not using it as a convenient scapegoat. What sounds better to shareholders “we’re replacing jobs with AI” or “we hired too many during the COVID hiring glut and need to lay more people off”?

GoatInGrey 1y ago
But what if I want the option that validates my untreated anxiety?

mattacular 1y ago

Does anybody really believe that SalesForce of all companies has successfully replaced 4000 real and necessary jobs with AI? Or is that more likely just an excuse to justify more layoffs in the tech industry for the usual reasons.

jlarocco 1y ago
It would be some kind of securities fraud for their CEO to say it to the media if it weren't at least partially true.
- franktankbank 1y ago
  Doesn't have to be true, just needs to be unfalsifiable.
93po 1y ago
It's less about justifying layouts and more PR: Salesforce is trying to sell AI products and they're marketing how good they are at AI by saying they removed 4k jobs with it
api 1y ago
Lots of companies using AI or RTO as excuses to just downsize since layoffs for normal reasons don’t look as good.
- adabyron 1y ago
  I really wish journalists & public speaking investors would call this out more. Though like non-GAAP earnings & adjusted EBITDA, very few care. Those that do are often old, technical, conservative & silent type of investors instead of podcasters or CNBC guests. RIP Charlie M.
- eastbound 1y ago
  Very probable those CEOs use AI to write the speech, asking “What’s the least antagonizing way of explaining the layoffs?”.
- nilkn 1y ago
  There's no doubt it can function as a convenient cover, but that doesn't mean it's having no effect at all. It would be naive to assume that the introduction of a fundamentally new general-purpose work tool across millions of workers in nearly every industry and company within the span of a couple years has not played any role whatsoever in making teams and organizations more efficient in terms of headcount.
techpineapple 1y ago
They did say this was specifically in customer service, which if there was a department I believe you might be replaced by AI this would be it; Alternatively though if the market is bad and there not launching as many new products or appealing to as many new customers, customer support may be a cost center you’d force to have “AI efficiencies”
dathinab 1y ago
tbh. for companies like SalesForce I always assume they have a lot of bloated unnecessary jobs which are done well enough by the people having them to needing a external reason to firing them in addition SalesForce grew in employment size in 2025 AFIK and 4000 jobs are for them only around ~~5%, which means it's to small to be a meaningful metric if you don't fully trust what their press department does (and you shouldn't) still I see people using modern AI for small productivity boosts all over the place including private live (and often with a wastely underestimate risk assessment) so in the best case it's only good enough to let people process more of the backlog (which otherwise would be discarded due to time pressure but isn't worthless) and in the worst case will lead to idk. 1/3 of people in many areas losing their job. But that is _without_ major breakthrough in AI, just based one better applying what AI already can do now :/ (and is excluding mostly physical jobs, but it's worse for some other jobs, like low skill graphic design positions)
- threetonesun 1y ago
  During the just-post-pandemic hiring spree I remember talking to some software developers who were doing very light coding in what I would usually think was a business analyst role. Those roles were both bloat that was lost once free money stopped flowing, and easily replaced (or reduced) with AI. And as software developers, it would be silly if we didn't think that businesses would love to find a way to replace us, as the software we have created did for other roles for the past 60 years.

mikelitoris 1y ago

I am sure he has had plenty of "heads" as a bigwig CEO. Also, it's "fewer" heads not "less".

adabyron 1y ago

Those 4,000 were "customer support" positions & Salesforce just happens to also sell an AI product for customer support. They also underperformed expectations in their last earnings. Companies like IBM & Klarna have made news for reducing positions like these & then re-hiring them. AI, like most tech, will increase productivity & reduce headcount but it's not there yet. Remember, the days are long & the years are short.

gamblor956 1y ago
This. Customer support is the "big" thing for AI replacement but it's also the worst role to replace with an AI, since customer frustration can (and usually does) lead to spurned customers switching to competitors. Salesforce fired 4000 humans and replaced them with a dumb chatbot that couldn't answer many questions beyond the very basic. Customers absolutely hated the chatbot and started rethinking their Salesforce spend, resulting in a number of customers reducing their spend or switching to another CRM provider entirely.
- rkomorn 1y ago
  > but it's also the worst role to replace with an AI, since customer frustration can (and usually does) lead to spurned customers switching to competitors Unless all the competitors are also going the AI route for support, because they're all equally greedy. That's basically what happened with the path from humans answering the phone to "press 1 to..." to "say 1 to...", or website chat support being replaced by non-AI bots. I really can't see an argument against the notion that customer service has been steadily worsening as a result of companies preferring to invest less on labor.

ofjcihen 1y ago

Salesforces CEO needs to consider replacing them with security product architects so they can figure out a way to send me logs that aren’t crap

SoftTalker 1y ago

Wait until his customers figure out that they don't need Salesforce anymore.

Ianjit 1y ago

CRM needs to convince the markets that it isn't an AI loser. By saying it has been able to use AI to automate internally CRM is hoping the market will believe that its AI is good enough to also sell to customers. Unfortunately for CRM, after the earnings print the market still thought it was an AI loser.