Much has been written about the “future of work” and much of it makes for gloomy reading. Study after study predicts that automation will upend entire industries and leave millions unemployed. A 2013 paper by two Oxford professors even suggested that machines could replace 47 percent of jobs in the US within “a decade or two.”
Conclusions like these sustain the narrative that the future will inevitably be jobless. Yet this view is favored primarily by the corporate sector and supported by negative trends in the so-called gig economy; workers and trade unions have played little role in the conversation. If that were to change, the future of work could look very different.
Three common assumptions skew forecasts of automation’s impact on employment. Addressing each is essential to protect workers’ rights and change the fatalistic storyline of the prevailing narrative.
The first assumption is that fully automated jobs will displace workers in the near future. This view is little more than conjecture and even those using the same data can draw different conclusions.
For example, a 2017 McKinsey study, drawing on similar datasets as the 2013 Oxford research, found that only 5 percent of jobs in the US could be fully automated, but that about 60 percent of US jobs could be partly automated.
In other words, automation does not mean that human work must disappear, only that it could become more productive.
If anything, current trends underscore why it is important to democratize how technology is built into business processes.
When major corporations introduce innovations to speed up production — like handsets to time warehouse workers in Amazon’s facilities — the unintended consequence can be a decline in productivity. For many workers, the way that technology is adopted might be more relevant than the technology itself.
The second assumption is that automation will not benefit most workers. However, people and politics — not machines — will determine how workers fare.
If we accept the view that technology will increase overall productivity (a point that remains disputed given the low levels of productivity growth in Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development countries during the past decade), then workers and political leaders could focus on advocating for a better work-life balance.
The fight for an eight-hour workday was waged more than a century ago, and the spaces created by the current discussion allow for negotiating a shorter working week. Some unions are already doing this; more should follow.
Finally, despite the hype, automation is not the most pressing issue for labor. Technology can be disruptive, but the biggest concerns for workers today are the ones they feel most directly: underemployment, precarious employment and stagnant wages.
According to the International Labour Organization’s World Employment and Social Outlook 2018, 1.4 billion people worldwide are in “vulnerable forms of employment” in the informal sector, compared with 192 million who are unemployed.
To be sure, today’s new technologies are affecting workers in adverse ways. That has always been true and people will continue to be displaced from one economic sector to another.
However, while technological innovation creates new opportunities, today’s gig economy, in particular, reflects how it can also weaken employees’ rights and increase economic insecurity.
Workers’ fears are real, which is why the labor movement has been fighting to defend workers in vulnerable situations. Expanding the concept of Just Transition, used in climate-related dislocations, to technology-related disruptions would be a valuable innovation for ensuring that automation leaves no one behind.
However, we should not accept the anxious narrative of a workless world. Technology and economic development are contested fields, and unions should focus on improving workplace conditions, organizing workers in new industries, and challenging the authoritarian business models that give employees little say over how their companies function.
Positive signs are emerging. Labor organizing is growing in the services sector. Employees are lobbying for better pay in some of the world’s largest corporations. Workers in the US are demanding — and often receiving — a living wage.
The next step is to ensure that the effects of automation feature more prominently in union organizing. The future of work is not predetermined; the story is still being written. The most important question, as always, is who gets to wield the pen.
Bruno Dobrusin is coordinator of the One Million Climate Jobs campaign at the Green Economy Network.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
In a stark reminder of China’s persistent territorial overreach, Pema Wangjom Thongdok, a woman from Arunachal Pradesh holding an Indian passport, was detained for 18 hours at Shanghai Pudong Airport on Nov. 24 last year. Chinese immigration officials allegedly informed her that her passport was “invalid” because she was “Chinese,” refusing to recognize her Indian citizenship and claiming Arunachal Pradesh as part of South Tibet. Officials had insisted that Thongdok, an Indian-origin UK resident traveling for a conference, was not Indian despite her valid documents. India lodged a strong diplomatic protest, summoning the Chinese charge d’affaires in Delhi and demanding
In the past 72 hours, US Senators Roger Wicker, Dan Sullivan and Ruben Gallego took to social media to publicly rebuke the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) over the defense budget. I understand that Taiwan’s head is on the chopping block, and the urgency of its security situation cannot be overstated. However, the comments from Wicker, Sullivan and Gallego suggest they have fallen victim to a sophisticated disinformation campaign orchestrated by an administration in Taipei that treats national security as a partisan weapon. The narrative fed to our allies claims the opposition is slashing the defense budget to kowtow to the Chinese
In a Taipei Times editorial published almost three years ago (“Macron goes off-piste,” April 13, 2023, page 8), French President Emmanuel Macron was criticized for comments he made immediately after meeting Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing. Macron had spoken of the need for his country to find a path on Chinese foreign policy no longer aligned with that of the US, saying that continuing to follow the US agenda would sacrifice the EU’s strategic autonomy. At the time, Macron was criticized for gifting Xi a PR coup, and the editorial said that he had been “persuaded to run
The wrap-up press event on Feb. 1 for the new local period suspense film Murder of the Century (世紀血案), adapted from the true story of the Lin family murders (林家血案) in 1980, has sparked waves of condemnation in the past week, as well as a boycott. The film is based on the shocking, unsolved murders that occurred at then-imprisoned provincial councilor and democracy advocate Lin I-hsiung’s (林義雄) residence on Feb. 28, 1980, while Lin was detained for his participation in the Formosa Incident, in which police and protesters clashed during a pro-democracy rally in Kaohsiung organized by Formosa Magazine on Dec.
RSS