Women have found themselves criminally underrepresented in most spaces, right from clinical trials to politics, and things are no different with AI-based jobs. A new report from LinkedIn shows that AI has continued to widen the gender gap in employment, with women accounting for just 26% of U.S. AI hires in 2025, compared to 50% of hires in non-AI roles. This is an important bit of data in a world where jobs typically held by women are already disproportionately impacted by AI, which means that not only are women more negatively affected by the technology, but they are also likely to miss out on opportunities where there is success to be found.
AI continues to be linked to job losses and growing unemployment among workers, but the technology also has some advantages to offer. According to the LinkedIn report, AI job postings have doubled since 2023, which comes as no surprise to most who have witnessed the abrupt emphasis on tech across industries and occupations in recent years. Not only is the number of AI roles growing, but they also pay better, with typical posts offering $177,000 in compensation, compared with $80,000 offered for a non-AI role. As organizations double down on AI investments and expansions, it may also be advantageous to think more deeply about the technology’s impact on the different segments of the workforce, and how the adoption process can be made more equitable for top talent.
A new study shows that as AI jobs continue to surge, the gender gap becomes more apparent, particularly in the highest-paying AI roles. (Image: Pexels)
Women Face Greater Risks Rather than Rewards in the AI Era as the Gender Gap in Employment Widens
Women may account for only 26% of AI hires in 2025, but the disparity is all the more prominent in the highest-paying AI roles. Across 27 countries, women account for only 13% of C-suite AI leadership roles at AI companies. LinkedIn found that women hold only 20% of Head of AI positions, 26% of Director of AI roles, and make up 18% of Members of Technical Staff. This isn’t exclusively an AI issue, as gender bias in leadership roles has been a central point of concern for decades. There have been improvements in women being allowed entry into C-suite positions, but not to the degree where one might perceive the gender gap to have been narrowed to a satisfactory degree.
The gender bias at the higher levels of the AI chain isn’t surprising when we consider that many women are left out of the talent pipeline that gets them a role at the top. The biggest gap may be apparent at the leadership level where there are fewer roles to occupy, but the problem is a pervasive one that builds from all directions. The most gender-balanced AI role was found to be that of Data Annotators, but this was also the AI occupation offering the lowest pay. As such, even when women break into the AI space, they are only best represented in the lowest ranks of this new employment wing that is developing today.
At a time when the labor market is already moving at a slower pace than expected on multiple fronts, being left out of such positions can hurt more than it would in a job market where non-AI roles are prioritized equally.
AI Enhances a Gender Bias That Already Exists
Some of this gendered gap in AI adoption could be credited to women having greater reservations about AI. From safety and privacy concerns to being disproportionately targeted by AI-generated content, women are less enthusiastic about the technology for multiple reasons. While these concerns likely play into AI adoption trends, and rightfully so, most appear prepared to do what is needed to continue to build their careers, even if that means making peace with artificial intelligence. This is where the limitations in existing systems become apparent.
A March 2026 report from the International Labour Organization (ILO) highlighted data with regard to women facing more workplace risks from generative AI than men. It showed that 29% of female-dominated occupations were found to be exposed to GenAI, compared to just 16% of male-dominated occupations. This difference was even more stark when positions with high automation risk were considered, with 16% of female-dominated occupations falling into the highest exposure categories, compared to only 3% of male-dominated ones.
“Generative AI is not entering a neutral labour market,” Anam Butt, co-author of the ILO research, explained in the report. “Discriminatory social norms, unequal care responsibilities and economic and labour market policies that do not fully address the needs of women and men continue to shape who enters which occupations and on what terms. As a result, women are concentrated in occupations that are more likely to be exposed to automation and remain underrepresented in AI-related jobs, facing higher risks but fewer opportunities from this technological shift.”
Lack of Overt Opposition Is Not Inclusion
Women are not barred from seeking employment for the most part, which might lead many to presume that this gender gap in AI adoption and employment representation is a voluntary choice rather than one that reflects the systems in place. This might be a short-sighted approach to the problem. Both men and women continue to hold reservations about AI for reasons of their own, but this does not limit their desire to find success in employment. There are still a number of non-AI jobs that pay well, but there is no avoiding the fact that most jobs will soon be tinged by AI one way or another, and the greatest job security will lie in roles that center on AI.
While promoting the employment and representation of an underrepresented group may prompt many to call foul and chant against DEI outside the office doors, there is still sufficient room to ponder why women face greater challenges in breaking into male-dominated spaces and what can be done to make them more hospitable for them. When organizations are supported by a diverse range of talent that represents the best of their industry, they benefit from insights and approaches that cannot be manufactured; only nurtured.
Many organizations may disagree, but users who are more apprehensive about a piece of technology may be best placed to use it with discretion and caution, reducing the tendency to allow errors in its operations to break into results. This is equally true for men and women and those with a more critical approach to technology today.
What can we do to address the role of AI in the widening gender gap in employment? Share your thoughts with us. Subscribe to The HR Digest for more insights on workplace trends, layoffs, and what to expect with the advent of AI.
