- TikTok is cutting hundreds of UK trust and safety jobs, continuing a global trend that already impacted Berlin, the Netherlands, and Malaysia.
- The company cites AI efficiency (85% of takedowns automated) as justification, but unions warn of increased risks to user safety.
- Cuts coincide with the UK’s Online Safety Act, which imposes strict compliance demands and heavy financial penalties for failures.
- TikTok’s European revenues are growing, but its reliance on automation risks eroding trust among regulators, workers, and users.
Hundreds of jobs hang in the balance as AI tools replace human decision-making.
TikTok’s latest restructuring has placed several hundred jobs in its UK trust and safety division at risk, just weeks after 150 content moderators in Berlin were laid off under similar circumstances. The company’s pivot away from human oversight in favor of automated systems is now unfolding across Europe, with operations also scaled back in the Netherlands and Malaysia over the past year.
Together, these cuts point to a coordinated global strategy: consolidating moderation into fewer regional hubs while expanding reliance on artificial intelligence. For TikTok, this signals a decisive bet that automation can handle the scale and speed of content review demanded by its 1.5 billion global users. But for affected staff, the trend marks an erosion of the very human expertise once considered essential for platform safety.
TikTok’s Justification: Efficiency and Scale
Executives describe the restructuring as an efficiency-driven reorganization. A company spokesperson framed the move as “concentrating operations in fewer locations globally” while evolving moderation, “with the benefit of technological advancements.”
According to TikTok, more than 85% of harmful or policy-violating content is already removed automatically through AI before it reaches human moderators. This, the company argues, reduces both operational bottlenecks and the psychological toll of exposing staff to distressing material such as violent or exploitative content.
On paper, these numbers suggest a platform increasingly confident in its automated defenses. Yet critics argue that efficiency alone cannot measure effectiveness—particularly when cultural nuance, satire, or borderline cases demand context that machines often fail to grasp.
Union Pushback and Worker Alarm
The Communication Workers Union (CWU) has sharply criticized the cuts, calling the decision “putting corporate greed over the safety of workers and the public.” Union representatives stress that content moderation is not a problem to be solved purely through scale and automation.
Human moderators, they argue, are uniquely equipped to catch subtleties—such as coded hate speech or manipulative misinformation—that may evade detection by algorithms. The CWU also noted the troubling timing: the announcement coincided with TikTok workers preparing to vote on union recognition, raising suspicions that the restructuring undercuts employee organizing efforts.
For workers, the fear extends beyond job security; it encompasses concerns that users, especially minors, will be exposed to greater risks if AI becomes the first and last line of defense.
Regulatory Pressure in the UK
The shakeup also comes at a precarious moment for TikTok in Britain. The UK’s Online Safety Act, enforced from July 2025, requires platforms to implement robust age checks and actively remove harmful material, with fines of up to 10% of global turnover for breaches.
The UK Information Commissioner’s Office has already launched a “major investigation” into TikTok’s data practices, underscoring official concerns about whether the platform’s algorithm and moderation policies are aligned with national safety standards.
Cutting human oversight at this time risks undermining trust with regulators, who are watching closely for evidence that platforms can meet their legal obligations. For TikTok, failure to demonstrate compliance could result not just in financial penalties, but in reputational damage at a time when its e-commerce expansion depends on public trust.
Global Strategy and Industry Context
TikTok’s restructuring aligns with a broader industry trend in which tech giants—Meta, X, and Snap included—have been steadily shrinking their human moderation teams in favor of automated systems. In each case, the argument is the same: automation reduces costs, accelerates enforcement, and limits human exposure to harmful content.
Yet the global backlash suggests that trust and safety cannot be treated as a cost center without consequence. For TikTok, the challenge is magnified by its geopolitical scrutiny: concerns about its Chinese parent company, ByteDance, already amplify Western anxieties over data governance and content manipulation.
Any misstep in moderation risks becoming part of a larger narrative about TikTok’s ability—or inability—to safeguard democratic and social norms.
The Strategic Risk Ahead
TikTok insists that affected UK employees can apply for other roles within the company and will be given priority if qualified. Yet for many, the offer does little to soften the blow of systemic downsizing. The greater question is whether automation alone can meet the rising bar of safety, cultural sensitivity, and accountability demanded by regulators and users alike.
By accelerating its reliance on AI at the expense of human teams, TikTok risks alienating both employees and policymakers. The company’s gamble may deliver short-term operational gains, but the long-term test will be whether it can convince stakeholders that AI is capable of protecting over 30 million UK users—and by extension, TikTok’s license to operate in one of its most important markets.
