Automation and the dumbing down of the work force

[Stephen Luft]

Wow!!! Interesting topic. And some intersting responses.

The advent of automation has made the mundane easier. No longer are you doing something by hand that can be automated, so long as you can afford to automate.

I don't believe that automation is the cause for what has been titled the dumbing down of the work force. That distinction belongs to the following:

1. Technology for making our lives so much easier and creating so many more distractions. I will be 40 in three months and can say that when I was in high school, there weren't nearly as many distractions as there are today. The computer was just starting out as were video games. You didn't have 1000 television channels, cell phones, internet. This is a double edge sword.

Transitioning from technology is:

2. Education - with all those distractions, it isn't that you are learning more, just different things. Gone are the days of a literature class and hand writing or typing a paper. You now have projects and homework that require the internet.

The skills that are being developed are different than what was needed 20+ years ago.

3. Lack of patience. In this world of instant everything, very few people want to spend the time to learn.


However, there is a greater problem that is threatening American Jobs and that is it's 800 billion dollar trade deficit. We are shipping jobs and ideas overseas.

Manufacturing and Service jobs are being shipped to India and China. Have you ever talked with anyone from Dell or your bank service center. Notice anything?

I don't remember whose post it was, but it stems from greed. How much profit is enough for the bottomless pit known as Wall Street?

How many of you own foreign cars?

Granted, the global economy distorts what is American made and what isn't.

Some posts have offered some classic economic theory regarding competitive advantage. I am not saying that a global economy is bad...because it isn't. However, it is the barriers to trade and unbalanced labor rates that magnifies the matter.

When you have an opportunity to purchase an American made product that may cost more than an imported product, what do you purchase. The jobs lost are a result of our hunger for imported products.

Products like the television, vcr and stereo were invented by American companies, but not one of them is manufactured here.

We have exported our technology at the expense of jobs.

The invisible hand of Adam Smith is now larger and on a world wide scale.

We have had situations where customers have chosen us, not because we were the least expensive, but because we still manufacturer our products here. Some have chosen us for another reason, and that is evident on our web site, and in contrast some have not chosen us for that very reason.

All in all, companies are dependent on both consumer America and corporate America. Many of you wear both hats. What are you going to do with your purchasing power? Does the money stay here or go overseas? The choice is ultimately yours.

One man's observation.

God Bless,

 

[Terry Woods]

OK... so... after all the responses... many in different directions...

It is clear that there is a particular point that needs to be clarified...

The title of the thread is... "Automation and the dumbing down of the work force".

"...dumbing down of the the work force." Who are we talking about here?

Can it be that the question is about "dumbing down" programmers?

While many of us consider ourselves to be part of the national work force... as in... a regular joe workin' stiff...

How could it possibly be that the question is about those that are getting smarter about automation and, in fact, developing automation? How can getting, and being, smart enough to develop automation be a "dumbing down"? Automation Developers/Programmers obviously have to have at least a little bit more on the ball than the average joe.

The question can not possibly be about those that are, in fact, very much involved in the advancement, and support, of that endevour.

Rather, it must be about those that are directly affected by the implimentation of that endevour.

That is, regarding the work force, on the whole (except for those promoting and supporting the affect in question)...

Has the introduction and proliferation of automation led to a "dumbing down" of the general work force?

This is a question about the guys, and gals, on the line, that are directly affected by the introduction of automation.

Those of you that thought it was about the "dumbing down" of programmers (namely, YOU!), and then, went so far as to take it as a personal insult... well, how short-sighted and center-sighted can you be?

It was very clear to me at the onset, that this is NOT a question of the "dumbing down" of the programmers that develop automated controls. Rather, it is about those that have been victimized by automation.

To say "victimized" might be a harsh condemnation... but then... how would you feel if YOU, yes YOU, you programmers you, how would YOU feel if YOU were replaced by a machine that some snotty-nosed kid just programmed?

What would you do? What would you do if some kid was able to do something that replaced what you did? (And maybe you are 45 or 50 years old.)

What will YOU do? I ask, only because... it's gonna happen!

In all of the industrial world, there will be just a couple of coke-drinking, snicker bar eating, kids that write programs... those programs will write programs... which will write other programs, which will write the programs that you used to write.

Believe it or not, there will be many kids that don't have to play the "No Kids Left Behind" charade. Those that did play the charade... well, they are supposed to be the "buyers"... without a decent education, without a decent job, without a decent wage.

And then, Stephen said...

"The invisible hand of Adam Smith is now larger and on a world wide scale."

Maybe he was dazzled by the high-side of the Adam Smith model... there is, however, a down-side in that model.

Adam Smith described a system that was "in balance", and also described the affects of a system that was not "in balance". He described the factors that were most detrimental to that balance... the most detrimental being greed... on the part of the money holders.

It's as simple as... What goes around... comes around.

And of course, the reasonable capitalist skims only a bit of the top as it comes around.

The bad ones... well, at worst, they skim it all (take it out of the local or national system).

HEY, Casey, how about a Poll on Retirement Age?

Not neccessarily what age one would want to retire at, but rather, what is a reasonable retirement age for workers. Workers like Coal Miners, Steel Workers, Ditch Diggers... etc. People that BUST there A$$es everyday for the man.

 

[harryting]

..What would you do? What would you do if some kid was able to do something that replaced what you did? (And maybe you are 45 or 50 years old.)

What will YOU do? I ask, only because... it's gonna happen!

I would cry, complain about how some greedy ***** put me out a job, then go on to find something else to do. I mean, what else is one going to do??

People are amazingly good at creating "work". Most of today's job doesn't even exist 20 years ago. I'm sure I will go through one career change or two before I retire. It might even be painful but that's life. Not to mention that is a nice life compared to every generations before the industrial revolution

I'm sick of people who keep refering to the so called Good Ole Day which never existed. The old days (1600s, 1700s, and before) are filled violence, killing, and sickness (from the book Freakonomic).

I'm still not sure about the "dumbing down of the workforce" thing. I look around this plant, for an example, I see kids that are smarter and more educated on the average then say, 10 or 15 years back when I started to work in the process/manufacturing. Just because you "see" more stupid acts on the media don't mean people are dumber today.

 

[patriot]

I don't know if the common line worker has dumbed down any. I've worked with many production workers and have gotten to know some quite well. I think the vast majority are good and decent people and on the same note, most are ignorant of technical matters. I don't mean that in a condescending way. It's just that most are wrapped up in their own personal drama and day to day lives and the job(any job) is simply a means to an end. They do it to put food on the table and pay bills, not for personal satisfaction. They are NOT career oriented people. They aren't necessarily dumb in as much as they just don't care.
Of course they understand what automation does to them, but very few are going to go back to school, hit the books, and get a degree. Even if the company or the government pays for it.
They just aren't made that way, never have , never will be. They will go to another joe job and do something else just as mentally boring. For most it's about paying bills,having fun and enjoying time with family and friends, and of course personal drama and other similar things.

Name one line worker who would rather study plc's when American Idol or Judge Judy is on??

 

[S7Guy]

The advent of automation has made the mundane easier. No longer are you doing something by hand that can be automated, so long as you can afford to automate.

So, what is different in 2006 than in 1796 then? Automation is nothing new. I'm sure the blacksmiths were really ripped when foundries began pumping out nails by the boatload, and glass blowers were put out of work by the Ball canning factories. The automation done today is no different than 200 hundred years ago other than we use computers instead of cams and wheels and belts.

Which brings me to this point: What is the big deal about programmers? We are just a small piece of the puzzle. If I was doing this in 1940 (meaning: automating industrial processes), I would be designing machines using complicated systems of cams mounted on rotating wheels instead (which is just another binary system). I can hold my own in programming with just about anyone, but it's more because of my familiarity with process control than some learned programming ability. Without some brilliant minds working on new developments (man, there are some clever people out there thinking up some unbelievable stuff), there wouldn't be much for programmers to do.

 

[goxx]

i'm sure every generation looks at the next generation and think the world will be in a sad shape. maybe our parents looked at us this way, as we are looking at the next generation.

maybe it is not the workforce that is being dumbed down, maybe it is how everyone is viewed as this group of people gets older and smarter. maybe we are all not mensa material, but not just anybody can program plc's. so maybe it is not the workforce, but the population in general. have you noticed the idiots they give driver license's to these days?

my daughter can't program the VCR, but put her on a computer chatting to 3 of her friends at one time and playing solitare, and she is a whiz.

great post #51 by rsdoran, good read. totally agree with your teacher opinions.

 

[Gunner]

No answers here.

Is automation dumbing down the workforce?

The way I interpret the question is; Are the workers that are being displaced keeping up with technology?

Well to be ambivilant Yes and No.

Some will keep up and others will make do. As Ron Doran stated it is a matter of ATTITUDE.

In the coming weeks myself and about 60 other workers are being made redundant because the company is moving offshore. The initial response by all was anger that the Multinational Company that we work for was greedy and willing to sacrafice our jobs and give them to a group of asian workers for as litlle as US$0.90 per hour.

Now as the closure date for the plant draws near, those that are "doers" have been active in looking for new work and gaining new and different skills to get them ready for the next chapter of their carrers. I myself am one of the lucky ones as my skills are highly regarded and am already being head hunted by other Companies.

Those that are still ****ed off and beleive that someone owes them something will be left behind, as Ron stated it comes down to ATTITUDE.

There was a great story on Australian Sixty Minutes last year about the Korean ship yards. This got a lot of tongues waging about how to do things the right way and the pay structure for various skill sets.
Click HERE If you are interested http://sixtyminutes.ninemsn.com.au/sixtyminutes/stories/2005_08_21/story_1483.asp

There have been so many great comments on all sides of the debate that have made this thread a great read.

One final thing; Is the glass half full or half empty?

I would think many of you would answer : It is twice as big as it needs to be.

regards

Gunner

 

[cntrlfrk]

The glass is half full.

I, like many here, have been through many twists and turns in my career. My motto has always been 'Always have a back-up plan' which doesn't necessarily mean to have another job waiting in the wings, but to be resourceful, maintain your education level, keep professional relationship contacts, and diversify.

Having grown up on a farm, then off to engineering school, finishing in business finance (How'd I get here?) I've always told people (usually in interviews) that I felt I can do anything if given the right tools. Anything from rebuild an engine to managing a stock portfolio. I firmly believe that if someone called me today and said that automation has been outlawed because it is putting too many people out of work, I'd have a job in the morning doing something else, something that may not pay as much, but may pay more, something I may or may not enjoy, but I would scratch and claw back to up to a place where my family would be taken care of.

Attitude is truly a large part of it. I watch my son play in High School sports and tell him that 90% of the game is in your head. You can watch a team get itself down once they are behind and give up, or you can watch a team start to fight harder and work harder to get ahead. Yes you have to have skills, and practice and be in shape, but in the end it's all how bad you want to win.

While I grieve for people that lose their jobs, most of the time it's poor management not staying competitive, keeping up with changing times. It's not Bush's fault the 'Big 3' haven't put out enough cars to compete with the rest of the world. You can blame 'The Man' but in the end 'The Man' is you, and only you that is responsible for what you make of your current situation.

A cat doesn't always land on it's feet, but it sure does try hard.

 

[rsdoran]

More food for thought

As a sideline I also do income tax returns. I have 2 examples to offer that show the "ordinary joe" does not really pay in the end.

Couple 1: He is a mechanic and made approximately 32K and she quit a large retail store to be self employed doing party planner retail sales. The gist of it is they had paid approximately 2K but recieved a refund of approximately 7500 for state and federal.

Couple 2: He had a business that failed and did not pay taxes for 2 or 3 years. He has a daughter in college so took a job and did file last year but the IRS took the refund...note that refund was approximately 4K which was about 3 times what was paid out. Last year he went back into business and has not paid anything in but will have a refund of approximately 3K.

I could offer more examples but to me this shows the "idiocy" of our taxation system.

The other aspect is where the money goes that is collected by taxes.
The government pays $20 or more for hammers.
Government contracts require pay scales far above minimum wage for unskilled laborer.
Esthetics...ie things have to be pretty...parks, offices etc.
Don't work? The government will provide food.
Don't work? The government will provide health care.
Don't work? The government will provide housing.
NOTE: not that either of the last 3 are bad things but they tend to decrease the incentive to work.

What has to fight for funding? Education and/or training...schools.

It is not automation that is dumbing down the workforce but its the progress that brought about automation. We have become complacent because we have had so many good years of life. We expect our children to never have to be laborers...even if they are incapable of doing more.

WE expect the government to take care of us.

Wake up. The jobs are leaving. Our kids are not dumber but educated poorly and/or taught that "Would you like fries with that?" is demeaning work.

The mundane tasks are gone but what is offered to supplement that time? TV, video games...???

I am just an old uneducated guy from the deep South in the US but I am smart enough to realize that we are "slowly" becoming a global economy that will have to create a means of equality for all.

I am not smart enough to offer a solution but until "people" everywhere stop being complacent a solution will be hard to find.

Y'all do realize that its easier for a government to control dumb people?

 

[Terry Woods]

From the Austrailian 60 Minutes program posted by Gunner...

RICHARD CARLETON: By now, you're probably thinking that Korea can do all this because they pay their staff peanuts. Well, that's what I thought and I was wrong, too. True, they work a 44-hour week. But they are very well-paid. I asked a manager at Daewoo just how much the average shipyard worker earns in a year.

DAEWOO MANAGER: US$50,000 for labour.

RICHARD CARLETON: US$50,000 for a labourer?

DAEWOO MANAGER: Yes. That's average.

RICHARD CARLETON: That's almost A$70,000 for a shipyard worker?

DAEWOO MANAGER: Yes.

RICHARD CARLETON: That's very high.

DAEWOO MANAGER: Yes, I think so.

RICHARD CARLETON: Now considering $40,000 or $50,000 is a good salary in Australia, Korea can hardly be called a low-wage country. The Koreans I spoke to were rightly proud of all this and more than happy to talk about it. But they were a little uncomfortable discussing just one thing — the boss's salary. So I asked Peter Bartholomew. If the average welder is getting $70,000, what is the boss getting — the man with 20,000 employees?

PETER BARTHOLOMEW: Maybe three times that, four times that, but not much more than that, frankly speaking.

RICHARD CARLETON: No $20 million?

PETER BARTHOLOMEW: No, not even $1 million, thank you. The money they make goes back to making more money. It goes, really, back into the core of the shipyard.

RICHARD CARLETON: That's sort of perfect capitalism in the theory, isn't it?

PETER BARTHOLOMEW: I don't know if it's perfect but it sure works.

Gee... I wonder how they can do that?

20,000 employees... where the lowest laborer makes 50-Grand... and the Boss makes much less than a million... gee... how perfectly... uh... perfectly... uh... what... uh... perfectly... uuuuhhh... un-American! Yeah! That's it! How perfectly un-American!

Now isn't this very, very interesting...

For those of you that are too young to remember, or too uninterested to know, the US used to be one of the largest shipbuilders in the world... we are no longer a shipbuilder (except maybe in a very, very minor-player role, except, at least for now, for our own Navy ships).

Most of the time the big complaint is that we are not able to compete with dollar-a-day wages... and yet, what's this?

A laborer at this company makes an average of US$50,000! I have to wonder what a Tradesman is getting paid. The text indicated that a welder can make $70,000, but then there was no clarification as to whether that was Australian or US Dollars. I would assume that he is saying US$70,000... it only makes sense, but I can't tell for sure.

But, the Big-Boss, the BIG-BOSS, only makes three or four times more than $70,000 (US or Australian). That's only $280,000 (US or Australian). Gee, how can anyone live on that pittance? Apparently they can... and do.

Regardless...
How can that company, paying those wages, hope to compete against those dollar-a-day workers... wherever they are?

Those wages sound just like what used to be standard American Union Wages... and yet... that company is thriving...

HOW CAN THAT BE???

How can they pay the same wages that our workers used to get??? The wages that supposedly drove their jobs overseas???

Hmmm... the Big-Boss, of 20,000 workers, makes only about a quarter-million bucks (US or Australian). And I'll just bet that those that report to the Big-Boss make less than the Big-Boss does. AND, I wouldn't be surprised to find out that the Middle-Management structure is very streamlined.

I'll bet that the Top-End costs (wages and bonuses for the big guys) are, relatively, quite small... thus allowing the company to put a lot more money back into the main-stay of the company... the workers!

Could this be why we are being beaten so badly?

Despite trying to pay as little as possible to employees, in the form of wages and benefits, our American Big-Bosses are having a terrible time trying to keep their businesses here and viable...

Could it be because... our "smart" bosses aren't cutting at the REAL FAT?

Oooohhh... but then, wouldn't that mean cutting their own income? Wouldn't that mean... no new boat, might have to sell one or more of those that he already has... fewer vacations... might have to sell the second and third home... Oh my God... POVERTY! POVERTY! WHY HAS MY GOD FORSAKEN ME???

This Korean company obviously doesn't suffer from the greed factor... they are interested in keeping the concern alive and thriving. They don't allow the money, necessary to keep the company viable, to be siphoned or skimmed off into private accounts.

...duh... do ya think?

What??? Like you don't understand the ENRON issue (among others)? Get real.

 

[Terry Woods]

Rons post reminds me of another strange aspect of the American system...

Corporations won the right to be recognized as persons, i.e. citizens. This happened at the turn of the 19th to the 20th Century.

Corporations, being legally recognized as a "person", i.e. a "citizen", is allowed to envoke the protections afforded by the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and the Amendments to the Constitution.

"Persons", i.e. "citizens", like you and me, are subject to a particular set of the Tax Laws enforced by the IRS.

But there is another "class" of "person" that is not subject to the same rules that we are.

Corporations can hide behind the rights held by citizens, citizens like you and me (real people), as described in the Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the subsequent Amendments to the Constitution, but they don't have to play according to the rules that "we the people" have to play.

I would love to see this go to the Supreme Court (maybe, considering).

The question would be... If corporations are recognized as "persons", i.e. "citizens", should they not be subject to, and suffer, the same tax rules subjected on, and suffered by, the "human persons" in this society?

And what's with "US Companies" having their Headquarters off-shore, and thus not subject to US Tax Law?

 

[CroCop]

Terry,




I've thought the same for a long time. Glad to hear I'm not the only one.

Great article, BTW. Wonder why it didnt' make any noise in the mainstream press?

 

[Rick Densing]

Rons post reminds me of another strange aspect of the American system...

Corporations won the right to be recognized as persons, i.e. citizens. This happened at the turn of the 19th to the 20th Century.

Corporations, being legally recognized as a "person", i.e. a "citizen", is allowed to envoke the protections afforded by the Bill of Rights, the Constitution, and the Amendments to the Constitution.

In 1886, . . . in the case of Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that a private corporation is a person and entitled to the legal rights and protections the Constitutions affords to any person

"Persons", i.e. "citizens", like you and me, are subject to a particular set of the Tax Laws enforced by the IRS.

But there is another "class" of "person" that is not subject to the same rules that we are.

We already have that system with "real" people. It is called the "progressive tax system."


The issue of corporate officer compensation is not a "left vs. right" issue. Until shareholders realize that it does not make business sense to pay people that much, it is going to keep happening. They have to realize that paying one guy $20million better result in at least $19million more profit than if the company is run by a guy making $1 million. There is some indication that is starting to happen.