It's describing the setting for a conspiracy theory. Multiple (in this case 2) people (in this case powerful ones) getting together and deciding that a certain outcome would be mutually beneficial.

And the second paragraph details the conspiracy is to work together to remove a certain type of employee in large numbers, so that AI tools have to be used in order to make up for that loss.

Pretty much, though I would not say they go together. 2nd paragraph is just a separate conjecture.

Personally, don't need that much evidence; are we old enough to remember the hiring gentleman's agreement in big tech?

Let's also not forget one of the main functions of HR, as an industry, these days: friction. You think salaries (and inflation) wouldn't go up if hiring managers had more freedom?

You say this as if humans do not collude all the time. The pejorative idea of a "Conspiracy theory" is such a great modern tool for those who want to collude to hide their collusion in plain view.

Somehow it has become a heuristic that if caste in, the collusion is instantly dismissed as fiction. Even better that the person who thinks collusion is happening must have a lower IQ than those who don't. How convenient for those who are colluding.