---
title: Only 71% of U.S. Workers Are Reskilling for AI, Even as Most Call It Essential
description: A survey of 15,000 U.S. workers finds 85% call reskilling essential but only 71% are acting, and wage research shows most credentials barely raise pay.
author: Darie Nani (Editor-in-Chief)
date: 2026-08-17T08:42:46.791Z
updated: 2026-08-17T08:42:46.801Z
canonical: https://www.sovereignmagazine.com/article/us-workers-reskilling-ai-gap-credentials
image: https://cdn.nanimediahouse.com/reskilling-ai-workforce-155583.webp
categories: Career Insights
content_type: Analysis
region: United States
publication: Sovereign Magazine
schema_type: Article
---

American workers have heard the message that they must keep learning to stay employable as AI spreads through their jobs. Doing something about it is proving harder, and for many the effort may not pay off the way they expect.

Eighty-five percent of U.S. workers say upskilling or reskilling is now a necessity, not a choice, and 78% say job security no longer exists without continuous adaptation. Yet only 71% say they are proactively developing new skills, a smaller share than the 77% global average, and well behind workers in India, at 89%, and China, at 80%. The findings come from the 2026 ETS Human Progress Report, 50 States Edition, released 14 August and based on a Harris Poll survey of 15,357 U.S. adults conducted from 25 August to 10 September 2025, with at least 300 respondents per state weighted to Census demographics. ETS is the organization behind the TOEFL, GRE and Praxis exams and is itself a testing and credentialing organization.

## Most Workers Say They Cannot Picture the Jobs of 2035

More than half, 54%, say they feel underprepared for the next generation of jobs, and 75% say they have no clear picture of what jobs will even look like by 2035. Workers estimate that AI already accounts for about 26% of their work and expect that to reach 43% within two years, a self-reported estimate rather than a measured figure, ranging from 47% in Alaska down to 18% in Maine and Wisconsin.

That uncertainty is showing up as fear. Fifty-eight percent report a fear of becoming obsolete, sometimes shorthanded as FOBO, and the number climbs to 74% among technology workers and 73% in financial services, two fields where AI adoption has moved fastest.

## Cost, Time and a Lack of Employer Support Are the Barriers

For most, the obstacle is money and time. Sixty-eight percent say the cost of upskilling is hard to cover, 63% struggle to find the time, and 57% find it hard to get support from an employer. Sixty-seven percent say they are interested in credentialing programs, but only 41% say they actually have access to one. State results vary: Delaware leads the country, with 89% of workers there saying they are proactively developing new skills, while Maine, Hawaii and Pennsylvania report the heaviest barriers. Sixty-one percent of employed U.S. college graduates say their university did not adequately prepare them for the workforce, a signal that the gap starts before anyone enters the job market.

> "America's workers are ready to adapt, but too many are being asked to do it without the time, resources or roadmap they need."
> — Amit Sevak, CEO of ETS

## Reskilling Pays Off Only When the Credential Fits the Job

Even workers who clear the cost and time hurdles face a further problem the report does not address: whether reskilling protects a career at all. Gallup found that in 2024, fewer than half of U.S. employees, 45%, took part in any training or education for their current job, so the barriers ETS describes are already visible in how few workers train in the first place.

Even among those who do train, the payoff is uneven. A Brookings analysis of more than 156 million U.S. resumes found that a worker's [first job-relevant non-degree credential](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/credential-boom-which-ones-help-workers/) is associated with a 3.8% wage premium, more than double the 1.8% premium tied to a first credential unrelated to the job. What made the difference was the match to the work, not the credential on its own, so a qualification chosen without that fit does far less for a worker's pay.

A separate Brookings study of worker retraining found reason for caution about treating retraining as a fix for AI-driven job displacement. Workers who went through retraining often did not end up in jobs less exposed to automation, and the study concluded that [keeping retraining relevant to AI may require rethinking how it is delivered](https://www.brookings.edu/articles/ai-labor-displacement-and-the-limits-of-worker-retraining/) altogether.

Together the evidence complicates the simple version of the advice workers are hearing. Reskilling can protect a career, but the credential has to be tied directly to the job a worker wants next. A generic certificate chosen because it is affordable or convenient does much less for pay, and a retraining program is not automatically a route out of an exposed role.

## FAQ

**Q: What should I do first if I want to reskill?**
Start from the job you want next, then look for training built for that specific role. The wage research suggests a credential closely matched to a target job is worth far more than a general one, so naming the destination comes before picking a course.

**Q: Is it worth paying for a credential myself?**
It can be, but mainly when the credential maps closely to the role you are aiming for. Most workers say they get little help from an employer, so many are funding and choosing this alone, and a credential that does not fit the target job is the one that does least for their pay.

**Q: Does where I live change the picture?**
Yes. The report found wide differences between states, both in how many workers are actively developing new skills and in how much AI already touches their work, so local industry and employer practices shape the options a worker has.

**Q: Why is a testing organization publishing a report like this?**
ETS runs exams such as the TOEFL, GRE and Praxis and works in the credentialing market the report examines. Its findings on the barriers workers face broadly match independent research from Gallup and Brookings.