A recent analysis of employee reviews on the popular job and salary transparency platform Glassdoor has revealed a surprising and vocal contingent of workers who express profound dissatisfaction with the integration of artificial intelligence into their professional lives. These sentiments are particularly pronounced among insurance claims adjusters, who, according to the data, harbor the most negative views towards AI in the American workforce. Reviews from this sector consistently highlight concerns about AI’s perceived limitations, its impact on workload, and the potential erosion of human judgment in critical decision-making processes.
The core of the adjusters’ grievances can be distilled into a few key themes. Many feel that AI is being implemented without sufficient consideration for its real-world application and accuracy, leading to an increased burden on human employees. Representative comments underscore this frustration: “Pushing AI to the point that you are asking humans not to use their thoughts and brains is such a turn off,” reads one review, while another states, “Stop forcing AI onto everyone.” A particularly blunt assessment found in the reviews declared, “The AI apps this company uses are all trash.”
This overwhelming negativity is not anecdotal. Glassdoor’s research, which analyzed thousands of employee reviews, found that claims adjusters who mention artificial intelligence in their feedback are critical 98 percent of the time. This figure places them significantly ahead of other professions in their opposition to AI adoption. The research suggests that the primary driver behind this sentiment is the perception that "AI-obsessed leaders" are forcing error-prone AI systems onto adjusters and, consequently, onto their clients. When these AI systems fall short, it is the human adjusters who are left to rectify the errors and manage the fallout, often facing the brunt of dissatisfaction from policyholders.
The Human Cost of AI Errors: A Case Study
Ahmad Jackson, a former claims adjuster for a major insurance company, exemplifies the challenges faced by his peers. Approximately a year ago, Jackson’s employer implemented an AI system for initial loss reporting, a process crucial for setting up claims and gathering essential information following an incident. The stated objective was to streamline the handling of simpler claims, freeing up human adjusters to focus on more complex cases.
However, Jackson recounts a starkly different reality. Instead of efficiency, he and his colleagues experienced a surge in misclassified claims that necessitated manual rerouting to the appropriate departments. He also encountered significant issues with AI-generated claim summaries, which often contained factual inaccuracies or "hallucinations." The repercussions of relaying these errors to claimants or their legal representatives were severe, placing Jackson in the difficult position of absorbing their frustration and anger.
“AI is getting things wrong,” Jackson stated in an interview with WIRED, reflecting on his experience. “And it’s implementing more work onto the adjusters.” The added workload, coupled with the stress of rectifying AI-induced errors, ultimately led Jackson to leave his position and seek employment with a different insurance carrier.
Geoffrey Conrad, a claims executive based in Mobile, Alabama, echoed this sentiment, describing an pervasive “AI fatigue” within the profession. “We’re pretty much exhausted as far as the amount of AI being shoved down our throats,” he commented, highlighting the relentless pace of AI integration that many in the field are experiencing.
A Profession at a Crossroads: AI and the Future of Claims Adjusting
The strong anti-AI sentiment among claims adjusters is occurring against a backdrop of significant shifts within the profession, largely driven by technological advancements, including AI. Chris Martin, a senior economist at Glassdoor, expressed surprise at the intensity of the adjusters’ negative reactions, noting that the findings prompted him to “do a double take” and initiate further investigation. Martin’s analysis suggests that the insurance claims adjusting profession is currently undergoing a profound reckoning.
Data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) paints a concerning picture for the future of claims adjusters. The BLS projected in 2024 that the number of claims adjusters in the United States was expected to decline by 18,900, or 5 percent, over the next decade. More recent data from May 2025 to May 2026 revealed an even more dramatic downturn, with employment in the sector dropping by a staggering 21 percent. For early-career adjusters, the impact has been particularly severe, with entry-level job postings declining by 50 percent since 2025, according to Glassdoor.
The BLS explicitly identifies technology, with AI at the forefront, as a primary catalyst for this decline. In recent years, AI startups such as Liberate and Pace have garnered significant investment, fueled by ambitious promises to "reinvent" the insurance industry. These companies are developing AI-powered solutions designed to automate and optimize various aspects of claims processing. Simultaneously, established insurance carriers are increasingly scaling their adoption of AI technologies to manage a growing volume of claims.
The Promise and Peril of AI in Claims Processing
The practical applications of AI in the insurance claims process are varied and rapidly evolving. For policyholders, this can manifest as interactions with chatbots instead of human representatives when filing a claim. AI tools are being developed to analyze photographs or videos of damaged property, bypassing the need for in-person inspections and generating repair cost estimates. Complex medical records, often spanning hundreds of pages, can be summarized by AI to extract critical information for claim evaluation. In some instances, an insurer’s AI system can process a policyholder’s uploaded documentation – including photos, videos, receipts, and other supporting materials – and issue a payout within seconds.
Companies like Lemonade, founded in 2015, have built their business model on this vision of AI-driven efficiency. Lemonade aims to replace traditional bureaucratic processes with "bots and machine learning." By the end of last year, its proprietary chatbot, AI Jim, was responsible for handling initial claim reports in 96 percent of cases, with automated systems managing approximately 55 percent of all claims. While more traditional insurers like State Farm emphasize a hybrid approach, combining human and digital expertise, the rapid advancement of AI continues to fuel concerns among claims adjusters about job displacement.
Paul Staats, a spokesperson for Lemonade, acknowledged the transformative impact of AI on the insurance sector. "AI is going to impact many jobs and threaten many incumbents in insurance and the economy," Staats told WIRED, adding that automation allows employees to dedicate their "empathy, care, and expertise on the most complex claims." He also stressed the importance of taking Glassdoor’s findings seriously, suggesting they serve as a valuable indicator for the broader industry.
Underlying Factors Driving Anti-AI Sentiment
Martin of Glassdoor elaborates on the psychological and economic factors contributing to the adjusters’ skepticism. When workers perceive an impending threat of layoffs, their reviews often become increasingly critical of AI. This sentiment is further amplified when individuals feel that a subpar product or service is being imposed upon them or their clients.
The feeling of being replaced is a palpable concern for many claims adjusters. Conrad, the Alabama-based executive, stated, “AI is just a tool. It should never be given the keys.” This perspective highlights a desire for AI to remain a supportive technology rather than a primary decision-maker.
However, there are acknowledged instances where AI can indeed enhance the efficiency of claims adjusters. Jackson noted that AI can be beneficial for handling administrative tasks, such as extending rental car bookings for policyholders. Similarly, Justin Tomczak, a representative for State Farm, indicated that the company’s objective is to provide agents and employees with improved tools, enabling them to dedicate more time to assisting customers.
The Challenge of Trust and Accountability
Despite these potential benefits, a significant hurdle remains: trust in the output of AI systems. Sandy Avina, a former claims adjuster now working as an insurance industry consultant, pointed out that even minor discrepancies, such as a smudge on a document or a missed detail in an AI-generated summary of a medical report, can lead to significant errors, including incorrect payouts.
A critical issue arises when policyholders, unaware that AI was the source of confusion or misinformation, attribute the mistake to the human adjuster. This can erode client confidence and damage the reputation of the adjuster.
Conrad, addressing the common perception of claims adjusters as detached figures, emphasized the human element integral to their role. He argued that a truly effective claims adjuster possesses both empathy and a strong commitment to securing the maximum possible financial settlement for the policyholder. He drew upon a personal experience from 25 years prior, when his own house was destroyed in a fire.
“If you would have told me that someone was just gonna come take photographs, and an estimate would be generated [by AI] off of photographs, I probably would have lost my mind,” Conrad recounted. His experience underscored the profound need for human connection and reassurance during times of crisis. “I needed somebody to make sure that I’m OK, my family’s OK, that we’re safe,” he stated. While acknowledging the potential utility of AI, Conrad issued a stark warning against its use as a replacement for human interaction and judgment. "I think that’s a dangerous strategy," he concluded.
The current landscape suggests a complex interplay between technological innovation and human concerns within the insurance industry. As AI continues to advance, the experiences and perspectives of professions like insurance claims adjusting will be crucial in shaping a future where technology serves humanity rather than supplants it. The vociferous opposition from adjusters serves as a potent reminder that the successful integration of AI hinges not just on its technical capabilities, but on its ability to augment, rather than diminish, the essential human qualities of empathy, judgment, and accountability.
