Introduction
The issue of technology changing the job market is not nearly a new one, as Frey and Osborne cite William Lee’s situation with the invention of the stocking frame knitting machine in 1589 (Frey, 2023, 6). I would loosely consider myself a proponent of automation leading to job creation and completely a proponent of utilizing automation and technology to create better, more sustainable jobs. However, I agree with the Queen's reasoning for not granting William Lee his technology patent. Keeping her subjects employed may have helped the short-term stability of the kingdom, but long-term technological advancements should undoubtedly be seen as a benefit. When the sewing machine was first patented in 1846, the mass production of garments allowed housewives and seamstresses to find employment at factories. These jobs created by technological advancement lowered the prices of garments, which increased their affordability and household income for those who chose to work in the factories (Stocks, 2021). Alternatively, Foxconn of China plans to automate 60K to 110k employees out of a job by implementing “FoxBots” (Woersdoerfer, 2023, 18). This is a case of mass unemployment due to automation, but is it really such a bad thing? The New York Times reports conditions at Foxconn facilities do not meet Amazon’s supplier code of conduct, waves of employee suicides, child labor, and unsafe working conditions (Condliffe, 2018). While an argument can be made that replacing these employees with robots could remove ethical violations, the point of discussion is that these factory jobs may be very automatable because they are generally repetitive and follow explicit instructions. Still, even when they don’t, computerization is improving at solving non-routine tasks (Frey, 2023, 15).
Robot-Proof Jobs
While computerization may be changing the labor market, I think that many fields can avoid a complete computer takeover. Firstly, while individual jobs may be at risk, most industries will not disappear from humans. Consider farming and construction, which have technologies like tractors and excavators to help with laboring. The laborers who may have been in the field sowing seeds have been replaced by “robots”, but the farmer managing the property is completely robot-proof and likely benefiting economically from the change. I think that managers are certainly more robot-proof than the individuals below them in a corporate structure. Rather than managing just people, they may manage equipment and people who maintain equipment. As we saw in the slides, social jobs are likely safe, so I would consider most service industry and leadership jobs to be generally robot-proof (Woersdoerfer, 2023, 21). While some jobs are more robot-proof than others, I don’t think any are immune to change due to technology. I think that jobs in the creative art industry may become even more valuable because the competition of AI-generate art will push people to produce better work, and consumers may want “real” art. Finally, while an AI revolution may come for some cognitive and labor-intensive jobs, I believe that education and training improvements can help workers adapt to the constantly changing job market.
Reforms
Technological revolutions can alleviate workers from poor conditions, like the possible implementation at Foxconn, but possibly leave thousands unemployed. The way forward is to minimize the cost of technical and public colleges to allow unemployed workers to make a career change. I would not argue for implementing UBI as a safety net because I think that the government should only provide an environment where citizens can earn a livelihood, not provide the livelihood itself. If cognitive laborers have sufficient access to education, they can robot-proof their own careers. Physical laborers are a harder group to help through reforms because you can be smarter than AI, but it is harder to be stronger than a tractor. Finally, advocating for a lifelong learning culture can help cognitive and physical laborers stay ahead of the technological revolution.
Sources:
- Frey, Carl Benedikt, and Michael A. Osborne. “The future of employment: How susceptible are jobs to computerisation?” Technological Forecasting and Social Change, vol. 114, 2017, pp. 254–280, source.
- Admin, Stocks. “How Did the Sewing Machine Impact the Industrial Revolution?” Industrial Embroidery Machines & Sewing Equipment Suppliers, 29 Mar. 2021, soource.
- AI and Labor Markets (Week 5) Slides, Manuel Woersdoerfer, 2023
- Condliffe, Jamie. “Foxconn Is under Scrutiny for Worker Conditions. It’s Not the First Time.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2018, source