Réseau d'Activités à Distance
rad2000.free.fr
| Réseau d'Activités à Distancerad2000.free.fr
|
You're reading
http://rad2000.free.fr/society1.htm
New Work Opportunities
Contributions during November 1996
Discussion of the relationship between new technology, work and jobs. The purpose of the list is to develop input to the current political debate in Europe about the Information Society.
Opening the discussion
Alan Mc Cluskey wrote: <<the first topic we plan to discuss is: How Information Society technologies and related developments could serve to create new work opportunities?... I suggest we begin by identifying possible new work opportunities that could spring from the advent of the Information Society and its related technologies.>>
New technologies bring new opportunities. But new realizations are not only technological innovations. They require sociological innovations. There will be a transition from "industrial society" to "information society" along a sociological and psychological transformation.
For example. New information technologies allow us to imagine a lot of kind of teleworking. But in the actual job crisis, most of this activities will not be offered to employees. They will be created by self employers, or will not. This require a psychological competence called autonomy. In a second time, the developpment of such occupations will have important results on the social organisation.
Nevertheless, all is not equally possible. A good analysis of the present time is necessary. First of all: what are the numerous and various reasons of this job crisis?
On 17-11-96
First topic
Alan Mc Cluskey suggested:<<... new work oportunities... from Information Society and... related technologies>>
Horace Mitchell wrote:<<continuing net increase in work and jobs has been a consistent pattern of the world economy in this century... I fear Europe is set to be mainly a customer for the new products and services, not a supplier...too many of the opinion formers and decision makers in Europe take a defensive and inward looking view, and are suspicious of the new technologies... I'd like to influence this and increase the proportion of opinion formers and decision makers who do understand and use the technologies....>>
It's a good idea to remind everyone of the general trend <continuing net increase in work and jobs> into which fit a smaller trend of continuing net increase in unemployment. We have to distinguish between a long term "need of work" and a medium term "unemployment increase. I suppose we are in a long term "end of job".
Old Europe will create few works in the exact ratio she'll stay <mainly a customer for the new products and services, not a supplier>. In order to succeed in climbing up to the Information Society, we have to drop consumption society. Information Society is not Information consumption but Information Processing by Computer, Information Exchange by networks and Knowledge Production by Human.
It's a commonplace to say: Information Society is a post-industrial society (Michel Crozier). This expression is probably dangerous. The Information Society is not after the Industrial Society. She's requiered by the industrial development. Probably, Dino, who was a drawer and a designer, is experienced in CAD-CAM. Each time we want to improve a cad-cam software, we have not only to write geometric programm (logical facet), neither to imagine a process (technological facet) to get the form in wood, metal or plastic. We have also to build a user friendly interface for the user, the designer. Alas, this is not very clever to express his own, internal, representation. We need ergonomic observation and research in order to know the internal way of work of the designer. The stopwatch of Mr Taylor (OST) is not very usefull. Nevertheless, if this problem belongs to the information society, it appears inside the industrial one.
This is developped, in French, at:
http://rad2000.free.fr/hh960507.htm
http://rad2000.free.fr/hh960614.htm
Horace: <<too many of the opinion formers and decision makers in Europe take a defensive... and are suspicious of the new technologies...>>
If they read pieces of news large companies publish upon themselves, they have good reasons for thinking productivity is too large. I worked for an international company who has changed 2 times her CAD-CAM software in 4 years. Each time, she published a 30% productivity increase. Each time, 100 designers went for 1 month learning and after that 3 months training. By the way, the work stations (IBM, Risk, RS6000) were changed (for Sun). Idem for the Operating System and the requiered learning and training periods. Who knows that, in these 4 years, not any new product was designed by this company? In a process of external growth, (2 OPAs, take-over bids) she had to reorganize her catalogue by the merger of 3 previous catalogues. With zero new product, the production of the design office was zero. Without new hardware and software the productivity would be decreasing. With all these additionnal costs, I don't know the word for this situation. I don't think it was "30% productivity increase".
The corporate advertising is too often a misleading advertising. Who knows that, many advertisments showing a "CAD-CAM designed new product" are made by marketing office, one or two years after the product was designed traditionnally with a drawing board (planche a dessin)?
http://rad2000.free.fr/producti.htm
So productivity is not the reason of our large unemployment. You are right Horace, opinion leaders and decision makers have to be well informed. We have to publish these facts, in order to <<increase the proportion of opinion formers and decision makers who do understand and use the technologies...>>
On 22-11-96
Job opportunities
<< the Information Society alone will -not- create a net increase in the job opportunities available if there is not a parallel change in our commercial and monetary systems. (Alan Mc Cluskey>>
Certainly. But having tried to explain that to my teachers in1971, at the beginning of our monetary system, I think it will take a long time. So, we have not to put this as a premise. But we may imagine opportunities which don't reinforce the imbalances caused by the anarchy of currencies.
As much as possible we have to avoid suggestions like: protectionism, devaluation, quota, cultural exception, fiscal incentive, ..., all artificial or easy answers.
Nethertheless, I believe that Information Society will create new works. More exactly, we build an Information Society when creating a new kind of works. By the way, when listing the works, we define what Information Society is. We all want to create works in order to fight against unemployment. A first reason of unemployment is a bad matching between offer and demand of work. All information technology improving the way a job searcher can publish his professionnal project, so that interested partners (employer, free-lance, other job searcher) are able to meet him is a good initiative. It takes a long time (usually 6 months) before a company who needs a new work publishes an offer. This offer will generally be an impossible one: Young, experienced, good studies, practical, etc. Information technology allows an informal dialogue during this lost time, between the manager in quest of worker and the lot of workers, in quest of job. Each of them has something to learn during this dialogue. If someone is quite good, but needs a small training, it's not too late to get a training course. This is an example...
On 26-11-96
Productive work
My opinion is that: "moving work from a location to other" is a kind of economic war. This exists. This is not necessary. While innovation has always an effect of "moving work from a location to other", the economic development is a real, net, increase of work. This is possible. We are no more at the stone age.
Curiously. Sometimes, nations want to do war and obtain, unwillingly, development (France, Spain, Great Britain, Flandres, at the XVIth and XVIIth century). Sometimes they try local development and get war. Nevertheless, economic development, real wealth, global work increase are possible.
Dino wrote, too: << opportunity to earn is connected at a flow of something. So this flow is possible where are differential of something. >>
Imagine Marco Polo, if his father had been a silkworm breeder and silk producer. This differential is the utility of trade. It gives value to salt far from the sea, to wood far from the forest, and to stone far from the mountain. This is certainly a work deposit. And, as you say, telework improves this fact, with virtual location, summing the ressources of local countries.
<< the dissemination of new technologies >>, connected to the positive assumption of differences between countries is probably a path to create works in several countries, without producing economic war.
Upon new work opportunities, Horace wrote:<< I think politicians have only marginal ability to affect the global course of events, >>
I agree. It's too difficult to become an established politician. When you are, you have no more reason to change anything. A system who allows you to become "somebody" is not really bad.;-)
More seriously. Each of us has a power. Our economic system is nothing but the sum of millions of micro decisions taken by each of us.
Horace wrote:<<Europe has a big opportunity to participate in this growth and to be a pace setter for positive changes.>>
Yes. The Information Society, next year, will be the sum of works we are able to create today.
On 27-11-96
New work opportunities
To Alan's:< enabling a better match between demand and offer.>
Dino asked if:< "better" means "at lower price"?> and continued:< Really it looks that.. whe are not in an open system. Why otherwise is there a job crisis? >
Just listed:
The better match will be a qualitative one. The good skill at the good place at the only good time.
Today, employees are paid every day even if there is work one day out of two.
Why lower price ?
The more each country will try to rob job opportunities from the others, the less these jobs will be paid, in all countries. This is the "negative sum game", each against all the others.
In a juxtaposition of "closed system" it's impossible to create a global dynamic, a common project. So, each decision-maker becomes pessimist, reduces his objectives and his employees...
This explanation is a sociological one.
On 28-11-96
New work opportunities
Dino Gruppuso asked the reasons of <<job crisis>>
It's an important question. If unemployment is due to a big productivity given by the new technologies, the more these new technologies will spread the more unemployment will grow. This false opinion is too often in the mind of politicians and opinion makers. So, it's important to remind: Persistent unemployment is due to a LOCAL EXCESS of productivity IN a GLOBAL LACK of productivity. This is given by a blind and pessimist competition in a badly understood situation.
1. An employer dismisses employees to improve his LOCAL productivity and reduce his LOCAL costs
2. Unemployment increases GLOBAL costs for the society. (social assistance, taxes, unused lifes)
3. Unemployment reduces the GLOBAL net income for the WORKERS (employed or free-lance)
4. Unemployment reduces the optimism of WORKERS and INVESTORS
5. Unemployment reduces the GLOBAL TIME used by the society to produce wares
6. Unemployment reduces GLOBAL WEALTH produced by and distributed in the society
7. Unemployment increases GLOBAL COST of "production" of too few WORKERS
8. FEW workers produced with an INCREASED cost means a lack of GLOBAL productivity
The only way to break this vicious circle is: To increase the global productivity by improving the skills of workers thanks to a larger and quicker circulation of information and knowledge. The "common information" must to increase.
Some causes of unemployment are given at:
http://rad2000.free.fr/eh960524.htm
On 29-11-97
Productive work
Horace, we are OK, each of us writting a facet of the concerned thing. But the formulation seems to be an opposition. We I write: <<If a worker can produce 1 000 pencils / hour with a new technology A, his emerging job will probably lead to the destruction of SOME other jobs, those of people producing 100 pencils / hour, using technology B. Especially IF customers have NO reason to prefer pencils B.>> You answer: << Not true... one result is to reduce the cost of pencils. In the Middle Ages only one per cent of the population could read and write, so there was a small demand for the tools of reading and writing. Writing was slow, so there were few books, and little incentive to learn to read. >> These are the two facet of a complex and dialectic process.
1. Technology A produces cheaper pencils. The customers save a quantity of their income when they buy A instead of B.
2. Technology A destroies SOME jobs in the expensive technology B. An amount of working time is liberated in the society.
3. Some workers from B learn the technology A. (Adjustment unemployment)
4. The global offer of pencils increases, reducing costs, improving technology.
5. The income saved by customers is available to buy the large amount of pencils.
6. The improved use of pencils create new needs and desirs.
7. New jobs appear: Teachers, Writers,
Many jobs get created because some jobs were destroyed. So, I'm surprised by your <<Not true>>.
Web sites of some contributors You want to be adviced!You don't like to connect yourself for nothing.
You want to receive an e-mail when something is new on the ETODL.
this small message:
"I want to receive an e-mail when something is new on the ETODL"
That's all;-))
Most documented, in french
Classement Thématique du Réseau d'Activités à Distance
Return toPage d'Accueil du Réseau d'Activités à Distance
Fax: 04 77 96 03 09