Hire Calling

Breaking Job Market News: Fired BLS Head Speaks Out, AI Retraining, Employee Honesty or Dishonesty!

• Pete Newsome

Share episode

Is your job safe from AI? A new Harvard study reveals only 25–40% of roles are truly "AI-retrainable," sparking urgent questions about the future of work. At the same time, politics and data collide as former BLS head Erica McEntarfer publicly defends herself against removal by President Trump, warning about the dangers of politicizing jobs data.

But that's not all. A new survey shows that over half of employees lie about their work hours, with Gen Z leading the way. What does this say about remote work, trust, and accountability? While discussing salary with colleagues is 100% legal, host Pete explores the emotional and cultural repercussions that can arise from implementing pay transparency.

Finally, we lighten things up with a surprising origin story: the history behind the word "work."

In this episode, Pete breaks down:
1. The limits of AI retraining and the future of jobs.
2. Why politicizing jobs data could be dangerous for everyone.
3. How work-hour dishonesty is reshaping employee trust.
4. The risks and rewards of salary transparency.

News Articles:
1. AI took your job — can retraining help?: https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2025/09/ai-took-your-job-can-retraining-help/
2. Fired BLS Chief Breaks Silence, Calls Her Dismissal a 'Dangerous Step': https://www.wsj.com/economy/jobs/fired-bls-chief-breaks-silence-calls-her-dismissal-a-dangerous-step-7e3a6a86?mod=jobs_news_article_pos1
3. Over Half of Workers Tell Employers This Expensive Lie — Especially Gen Z: https://www.entrepreneur.com/living/over-half-of-workers-tell-employers-this-expensive-lie/497132
4. Can you talk about salary at work with colleagues?: https://www.thehrdigest.com/can-you-talk-about-salary-at-work-with-colleagues/

Don’t miss out! Subscribe for weekly updates on the latest job news. 

🧠 WANT TO LEARN MORE? Be sure to subscribe and check out 4 Corner Resources at https://www.4cornerresources.com/

👋 FOLLOW PETE NEWSOME ONLINE:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/petenewsome/
Blog Articles: https://www.4cornerresources.com/blog

Pete Newsome:

Today's job market headlines include the former head of BLS defending herself publicly and a new survey that shows employees aren't always honest about how much they work. But first, a team of researchers at Harvard analyzed the outcome of workers who participated in a job training program after losing their job to AI. It shows that only 25 to 40 percent of occupations are considered AI retrainable. That means that the workers can successfully move to higher wage, more AI intensive jobs. So think roles in the legal field, computer and math, and design and media. That's what ranked highest on this adaptability scale. My second takeaway is a reminder of why I didn't go to Harvard after looking at the complex formula they used to create this index in the first place. The third thing I took from the study is that workers who lost their jobs in high AI exposure roles so those would be customer service reps, clerks and cashiers they actually benefited financially. Their income on average went up about $1,500 per quarter, and that's a significant amount. And they didn't do that by doubling down on AI and going farther in that direction. It was the opposite they went into less AI intensive jobs, and so that's good news for now. But here's the thing this study was done between 21 and 23. It's a very different job market now. It's much tighter than it was in, so those increased earnings may not be as realistic today as they were just a couple of years ago. And the other thing is that AI is evolving so rapidly. Two years is kind of an eternity in that space right now. So I don't know that the jobs that were AI immune then are just as AI immune now, but it is an interesting study and one worth checking out.

Pete Newsome:

Moving on, erica McIntarfer is the former head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics. She was removed very publicly recently by President Trump and she's broken her silence and called that move a dangerous step for the US economy. She warned that politicizing data, which she's accusing him of doing, puts America on the same path as other countries like Argentina and Turkey, where they've suffered just disastrous economic crises. And McIntyre said that she came into that role with plans to modernize how BLS collects data, but instead spent most of her tenure fending off political interference, which primarily came from Doge. She has fully defended the agency's integrity, stressing that the jobs data revisions that have recently angered the president and have been very public are just routine and weren't manipulated at all. I don't know that anyone believes the data is being manipulated as much as they just can't rely on it because of the inconsistencies and the massive revisions. We saw over 800,000 jobs revised last year. Two weeks ago there was a 911,000 job revision. That is massive and each month there are significant revisions. That kind of happen in the small print of the reports that come out, but now there's a lot of light on those. The BLS head has been fired. She says it's not her fault. President Trump has a nominee in place EJ Antony. We'll see if he gets approved through Congress soon, but it's a mess right now and the trust is definitely gone, at least for the time being.

Pete Newsome:

In our next headline it turns out more than half of all workers lie to their employers. This is according to a new global survey of 2,000 employees. It shows just 18% of people are actually working the 7 to 8 hours that their managers think they are. Over 60% of respondents admit that they're not fully honest on their timesheets. 44% say they occasionally round up their hours, 12% say they stretch the truth and 3% say it's a regular thing. That leaves just 41% who are 100% honest. So good for you guys. Now this is self-reported. Don't blame the messenger here, but Gen Z seems to be the biggest culprit. Only 35% of Gen Z claim to be perfectly honest. That's compared to 46% of Gen X, so no surprise there. And 43% of millennials are honest all the time. These survey results are published on entrepreneurcom, where they also cite a Gallup report estimating disengaged workers cost $438 billion in lost productivity in 2024. That is a massive amount of money, no matter how you slice it, and a big disconnect between what companies think their workers are doing and what they're actually doing.

Pete Newsome:

One more thing that jumped out at me is that 55% of respondents claim to have taken a nap when they were supposed to be working. This dates me, but I can't not picture George Costanza from Seinfeld sleeping under his desk. I want to believe that those people who were sleeping at work were doing it at home. Now, that's something you should have lied about, because if your employer is thinking about making everyone go back to the office, you shouldn't admit to sleeping on the job. But I also want to picture a bunch of people sleeping under their desk at work. That's much more entertaining. But I also want to picture a bunch of people sleeping under their desk at work. That's much more entertaining.

Pete Newsome:

And the final headline today, hr Digest asks can you talk about salary at work with colleagues? Now the article goes into a lot of detail about whether you should and how managers should handle that and whether it's legal. So let me cut to the chase. The answer in almost every case is yes, you absolutely can do it. It's protected under federal law. Employers can discourage it. I mean, that is something that many do, some more than others but there's really no way for them to prevent it and very few actually try.

Pete Newsome:

Now for employees, I've seen this as a personal choice. Some people are very open and will be quick to share their income, and others would never consider doing that at all. And having worked with hundreds of companies over the past 20 years in staffing, I've seen environments where comp plans were widely published and just common knowledge, and others where that information was pretty tightly guarded. And in those scenarios where it's just not public, I've seen those conversations lead to hurt feelings and disruption more often than not. So it's really an individual choice.

Pete Newsome:

There's no reason why you shouldn't share that information, but just know that if you're the one who makes more money, there may be some resentment by those you share it with. And if you're the one who doesn't, well, there's a good chance your feelings are going to be hurt and you're gonna be pissed and rightfully so and then the managers have to deal with the fallout. So this is a story as old as time where, when that topic comes up, emotions are definitely going to be involved. And the truth of the matter is, if you're interested in finding out what your colleagues make, go ahead and pursue it. I don't think there's a perfect answer in that scenario, but just be prepared that there's going to be some fallout, unless it's a company that pays everyone the same. And if I think about all of the experiences I've had and what I've been exposed to, I would say very often, most of the time, it's not a situation where everyone's getting the same comp. So just proceed with caution if you decide to have that discussion and just know that there's going to be some consequences not disastrous, but definitely emotional.

Pete Newsome:

And then our fun fact for the day the word work Doesn't sound like fun, but here we are. The word work is from the Proto-Indo-European word worg and it means to do so. You do something, you get paid for it. That's work. That's where we are. So thank you for listening today. Please like, subscribe, share with anyone you think might be interested and, as always, I'd love any feedback or comments that you have. Talk to you soon.