A true just transition means robust training, guaranteed jobs and pensions for fossil fuel industry workers.
From the executive summary:
From driverless cars to factories operated by robots and stores with self-checkout systems, automation and technology are changing the way we perceive and do work. But how do all these technological changes affect men and women differently?
According to Women, Automation, and the Future of Work, an Institute for Women’s Policy Research (IWPR) report, technological change will affect men and women differently in a number of ways. The first study of its kind in the United States, this report estimates the risk of automation across occupations by gender and presents a comprehensive picture of what we know—and what we don’t—about how the future of work will affect women workers.
This study finds that discussions about technological change and the future of work must include gender as part of the analysis. That’s because the jobs most commonly held by women—cashiers,secretaries, and bookkeeping clerks, for example—face some of the highest risks of becoming automated in the future. And while men are not immune to the risks of technological change, women are even more likely to work in jobs where technology and automation threaten to displace them.
This report examines not only the impact of these technological shifts on the quantity of jobs but also the quality of jobs in the future. Drawing on occupational projections from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and recent research on the potential for automation across occupations, IWPR researchers developed a Future of Work Database to analyze the potential impact of technological changes on:
■ the number of jobs
■ the nature of work and how it’s done
■ the quality of work
■ the future of work and family
By increasing our understanding of the potential impact of these technological changes, we can create more gender-aware policies that will increase equality and the quality of jobs in the coming decades.
Automation is an important ingredient driving economic growth and progress. Automation has enabled us to feed a growing population while allowing workers to transition from subsistence farming to new forms of work. Automation helped moved us from a craft system to mass production, from blue-collar to white-collar to “new collar” work—with better work, higher wages, more jobs, and better living standards.
But without adequate policies and institutions, automation can also have negative effects on individuals and communities. Emerging technologies—including artificial intelligence, machine learning, and advanced robotics—have the potential to automate many tasks currently performed by workers, leading to renewed questions over what the future holds for the American workforce. We must ensure the proper support structures are in place to promote opportunity and prosperity for all.
Automation and a Changing Economy is divided into two sections.
Part I, Automation and a Changing Economy: The Case for Action, explores how automation impacts the economic security and opportunity of the American worker…..
Part II of this report, Automation and a Changing Economy: Policies for Shared Prosperity, outlines a program to address automation’s challenges and opportunities……
Source: Wal-Mart, 2019
From the press release:
… Now automation promises to radically reshape the next generation of work in America. Some see automation as a threat — the source of widespread job displacement. Others see it as an opportunity — the source of higher-skilled, higher-paid jobs as technology takes over tedious and repetitive tasks. All agree that automation has arrived and is quickly changing the American workplace. ….
America at Work: A National Mosaic and Roadmap for Tomorrow examines resiliency, or the capacity to respond to change — in this case, automation. The report examines more than 3,000 counties in the United States with the goal of helping communities plan for their individual situations and develop responses that will position them to survive and thrive in a changing economy.
Counties are broken into eight community archetypes: Urban Centers & Core Suburbs, Urban Periphery, Smaller Independent Economies, Americana, Distressed Americana, Rural Service Hubs, Great Escapes and Resource-Rich Regions. ….
A new study shows the depth — and the root causes — of the public sector’s workforce problem.
– A National Association of State Chief Administrators survey shows that state government job postings rose 11 percent from 2013 to 2017.
– Meanwhile, the number of people applying to state jobs dropped by 24 percent.
– CAOs cited noncompetitive salaries, negative perceptions about public service and insufficient recruitment as reasons.
Job One: Reimagine Today’s State Government Workforce
Source: Kayla Leslie, National Association of State Chief Administrators, March 2019
From the press release:
U.S. state governments face growing challenges attracting, building and retaining critically important talent and workforce skills, according to new research from the National Association of State Chief Administrators (NASCA) in collaboration with Accenture (NYSE: ACN) and NEOGOV.
Based on surveys of chief administrators and human resource (HR) directors in 33 states, a survey of nearly 3,000 state-government job seekers, and analyses of over 14,000,000 public sector job postings, the research — published today in a report titled Job One: Reimagine Today’s State Government Workforce — shows a widening gap between the number of open jobs and the number of applicants but also highlights strategies to help reverse the trend…..
From the abstract:
We present a framework for understanding the effects of automation and other types of technological changes on labor demand, and use it to interpret changes in US employment over the recent past. At the center of our framework is the allocation of tasks to capital and labor—the task content of production. Automation, which enables capital to replace labor in tasks it was previously engaged in, shifts the task content of production against labor because of a displacement effect. As a result, automation always reduces the labor share in value added and may reduce labor demand even as it raises productivity. The effects of automation are counterbalanced by the creation of new tasks in which labor has a comparative advantage. The introduction of new tasks changes the task content of production in favor of labor because of a reinstatement effect,and always raises the labor share and labor demand. We show how the role of changes in the task content of production—due to automation and new tasks—can be inferred from industry-level data. Our empirical decomposition suggests that the slower growth of employment over the last three decades is accounted for by an acceleration in the displacement effect, especially in manufacturing, a weaker reinstatement effect, and slower growth of productivity than in previous decades
From the abstract:
The Industrial Revolution. The Digital Age. These revolutions radically altered the workplace and society. We may be on the cusp of a new era—one that will rival or even surpass these historic disruptions. Technology such as artificial intelligence, robotics, virtual reality, and cutting-edge monitoring devices are developing at a rapid pace. These technologies have already begun to infiltrate the workplace and will continue to do so at ever increasing speed and breadth.
This Article addresses the impact of these emerging technologies on the workplace of the present and the future. Drawing upon interviews with leading technologists, the Article explains the basics of these technologies, describes their current applications in the workplace, and predicts how they are likely to develop in the future. It then examines the legal and policy issues implicated by the adoption of technology in the workplace—most notably job losses, employee classification, privacy intrusions, discrimination, safety and health, and impacts on disabled workers. These changes will surely strain a workplace regulatory system that is ill-equipped to handle them. What is unclear is whether the strain will be so great that the system breaks, resulting in a new paradigm of work.
Whether or not we are on the brink of a workplace revolution or a more modest evolution, emerging technology will exacerbate the inadequacies of our current workplace laws. This Article discusses possible legislative and judicial reforms designed to ameliorate these problems and stave off the possibility of a collapse that would leave a critical mass of workers without any meaningful protection, power, or voice. The most far-reaching of these options is a proposed “Law of Work” that would address the wide-ranging and interrelated issues posed by these new technologies via a centralized regulatory scheme. This proposal, as well as other more narrowly focused reforms, highlight the major impacts of technology on our workplace laws, underscore both the current and future shortcomings of those laws, and serve as a foundation for further research and discussion on the future of work.
A few hundred thousand federal employees earn relatively low wages, and their numbers vary significantly across states.
From the abstract:
We present a framework for understanding the effects of automation and other types of technological changes on labor demand, and use it to interpret changes in US employment over the recent past. At the center of our framework is the task content of production. Automation, which enables capital to replace labor in tasks it was previously engaged in, shifts the task content of production against labor because of a displacement effect. As a result, automation always reduces the labor share in value added (of an industry or economy) and may also reduce labor demand even as it raises productivity. The effects of automation are counterbalanced by the creation of new tasks in which labor has a comparative advantage. The introduction of new tasks changes the task content of production in favor of labor because of a reinstatement effect, and always raises the labor share and labor demand. We show how the role of changes in the task content of production—due to automation and new tasks—can be inferred from industry-level data. Our empirical decomposition suggests that the slower growth of employment over the last three decades is accounted for by an acceleration in the displacement effect, especially in manufacturing, a weaker reinstatement effect, and slower growth of productivity than in previous decades.
From the summary:
This is the first report of a Keystone Research Center project on the “Future of Work.” The aim is to identify public policies that could help ensure that the application and diffusion of artificial intelligence (AI) over the next several decades fosters an economy in which Americans generally thrive. The project is motivated, in part, by concern that the opposite could occur: that AI will exacerbate the already high levels of income and wealth inequality in the United States. Our most important conclusion is that AI need not make our inequalities more severe. Creative public policies could lead to an AI economy “that works for the many, not just the few.”
The study design has been informed by the two principal authors’ experience at the one-time Office of Technology Assessment (OTA) of the US Congress. To guide the undertaking and provide feedback on its products, we recruited an advisory panel of nationally recognized academics and representatives of think tanks and the corporate, labor, and non-profit sectors. The project methodology combines interviews with technology experts, policy analysis, synthesis of research literature and, still to come, sectoral studies.
This first report contains three main parts. (1) Following an introduction, Sections II-IV contain an analysis of AI’s likely impacts through the lens of technology. Section II reviews past impacts of innovations including robotics and information technology on the economy and jobs. Section III looks at AI itself, how it does and does not go beyond previous technologies and substitute for human capacities and intelligence. Section IV explores the difficulties of predicting AI’s job impacts. (2) Section V, “The Plight of the American Worker,” considers the labor market context in which AI systems will spread and the roots of the economic inequality from which the nation suffers. (3) Section VI surveys policies that could influence inequality and the distribution of the benefits of productivity growth as AI spreads.