WiseTech Global makes software that handles logistics and customs for freight companies worldwide. Its CargoWise platform is estimated to process roughly 75% of global customs transaction data. In February, the company announced it would cut around 2,000 roles, nearly a third of its global workforce, blaming advances in AI for making those positions unnecessary. Three months later, the people whose jobs are on the line are still waiting.
Consultation deadlines have shifted repeatedly. Union communications about the restructure reportedly went unanswered. A Sydney-based software engineer publicly called out the company for moving meetings and receiving no explanation. The CEO said the company wants to make "right decisions, not rushed decisions," but employees noted that transparency and speed are both part of making a decision well.
The China detail is the one that cuts through the noise. Workers at WiseTech's Chinese offices say the AI justification was removed from their redundancy notifications. The reason is almost certainly legal. Courts in Hangzhou and Beijing have each ruled, in separate cases, that firing an employee because AI replaced their role is not a valid legal reason for termination under Chinese labor law. The courts found that adopting AI is a deliberate business strategy, not an unforeseen event, so companies cannot use it to push the cost of that strategy onto workers. One ruling found the company had to offer reasonable reassignment, not just a demotion with a 40% pay cut.
There is no equivalent protection in the United States, where employers can generally let someone go for any reason not specifically banned by law, and AI replacement is not on that list. The EU has no such rule either. China's approach appears to be driven partly by social stability: youth unemployment there sits above 15%, and the government is under pressure not to let automation become a pretext for mass dismissals.
The broader picture is more complicated than any single company. A term called "AI washing" has become common among analysts: companies citing AI as the cause of job cuts when the real reasons are more ordinary, things like cost pressure, the need to fund expensive AI infrastructure, or unwinding the overhiring that happened during the pandemic years. Even OpenAI's own CEO said publicly that a meaningful share of layoffs currently being attributed to AI would have happened anyway.
A Gartner survey of 350 large companies found that many reduced their workforces regardless of whether their AI tools were generating any measurable return yet. A Forrester analyst put it plainly: if you are cutting jobs without a working AI system ready to do that work, you are cutting for financial reasons and hoping AI fills the gap later.
WiseTech's own numbers complicate the AI narrative further. The company reported first-half profits that came in 6% above what analysts expected, on the same day it announced the cuts. Its stock rose 11%. A major client, global freight company DSV, has since announced it will leave WiseTech's platform entirely, a contract analysts at Jefferies estimate is worth around $150 million in annual revenue, or roughly 9% of WiseTech's current base. That is a business problem, not an AI efficiency story.
For anyone running a business with staff in multiple countries, this WiseTech episode is a live demonstration of something that will only become more common. When a company announces AI-driven job cuts, the legal exposure is different depending on where those employees sit. China is the clearest example right now, but other governments are watching. The way you justify a decision internally is becoming a legal document, not just a management communication.