Digitalisation of the economy and its impact on labour markets —

<strong>Digitalisation</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> <strong>economy</strong> <strong>and</strong> <strong>its</strong> <strong>impact</strong> on labour markets
20 th century according to Claudia Goldin <strong>and</strong> Larry Katz (2007), enabling <strong>the</strong>m
to obtain good <strong>and</strong> sufficiently well-paid jobs.
A quite natural deduction from this point is that, in <strong>the</strong> current context <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>
Fourth Industrial Revolution, it is necessary to improve workers’ skills in order
to enable <strong>the</strong>m, as in <strong>the</strong> last century, to win <strong>the</strong> new race that has already
begun. This race against <strong>the</strong> machine is described by Brynjolfsson <strong>and</strong> McAfee
(2011) in <strong>the</strong>ir first joint book, which recommends investment in human
capital: ‘we need not only organizational innovation, orchestrated by
entrepreneurs, but also a second broad strategy: investment in <strong>the</strong>
complementary human capital – <strong>the</strong> education <strong>and</strong> skills required to get <strong>the</strong>
most out <strong>of</strong> our racing technology’.
But is it not different this time? Several analyses stress that <strong>the</strong> jobs that are
going to disappear will do so definitively, <strong>and</strong> that <strong>the</strong>re will no longer be a
refuge for <strong>the</strong> losers in o<strong>the</strong>r segments <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> labour market (Roubini 2015).
As already pointed out, <strong>the</strong>re will be tremendous job losses among some
sections <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> population, in particular among low- <strong>and</strong> semi-skilled workers.
Some commentators even speak <strong>of</strong> a ‘jobless future’ (Ford 2015).
Yet, according to Roubini, even a massive effort at education <strong>and</strong> training in
<strong>the</strong> new technologies <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> new digital world might well not suffice to include
<strong>the</strong>se segments <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> population in social progress <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> promised affluence.
This scepticism leads him to suggest that o<strong>the</strong>r solutions might prove
indispensable, such as permanent income support, a streng<strong>the</strong>ning <strong>of</strong> basic
social services (health care, pensions, etc.) for persons definitively excluded
from <strong>the</strong> labour market by machines <strong>and</strong> algorithms. ‘A most fragile balance –
between <strong>the</strong> freedom <strong>of</strong> markets <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> prosperity <strong>of</strong> workers – must be
sought <strong>and</strong> found’ (Roubini 2015).
But this question is even more complex. For what is really concealed beneath
<strong>the</strong> idea that ‘<strong>the</strong> worker <strong>of</strong> tomorrow has to be trained in new technologies’?
What will <strong>the</strong> new kinds <strong>of</strong> training required by <strong>the</strong> digital revolution actually
look like? Will we all have to become information technology engineers <strong>and</strong>
programmers? Or will <strong>the</strong> vast majority <strong>of</strong> future jobs be performed by <strong>the</strong>
digital galley slaves who will be given <strong>the</strong> tasks <strong>of</strong> classifying data, filtering
images <strong>and</strong> cleaning up forums?
Or again, as suggested by Head, in <strong>the</strong>ir role as tools <strong>of</strong> machines <strong>and</strong>
algorithms will not workers be increasingly less required to use <strong>the</strong>ir own
know-how, <strong>the</strong>ir own skills <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>ir own experiences? Will <strong>the</strong> technicians
working for <strong>the</strong> lift company Kone still need a specialised form <strong>of</strong> training when
<strong>the</strong>ir magic boxes will be able to tell <strong>the</strong>m what parts need replacing, in what
order <strong>and</strong> according to which detailed procedures? Will <strong>the</strong> workers on <strong>the</strong>
Bosch Rexroth intelligent production lines still need training in order to
perform actions dictated by <strong>the</strong> infrastructures?
These are some <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> questions that show that <strong>the</strong> topic <strong>of</strong> training is not as
straightforward or unequivocal as one might have thought. We have seen in
WP 2016.02
47