roundtable: Re: Curious comment about Job Displacement, CITS
roundtable: Re: Curious comment about Job Displacement, CITS
Re: Curious comment about Job Displacement, CITS
donald ford (dpf@netcom.com)
Thu, 7 Sep 1995 15:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 1995 15:04:11 -0700 (PDT)
From: donald ford <dpf@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Curious comment about Job Displacement, CITS
To: roundtable@cni.org
In-Reply-To: <199509070418.WAA11163@mail.usa.net>
Message-Id: <Pine.3.89.9509071524.A3463-0100000@netcom22>
some schools used to teach some of this. maybe not anymore. some
awful good points!
Donald Ford
<dpf@netcom.com>
On Wed, 6 Sep 1995 ics@usa.net wrote:
>
> Regards to the Group:
>
> But....
>
> > THE DE-SKILLING OF AMERICA
> > "One thing this fascination with computer technology and saving
> > microseconds will accomplish is to further dampen earnings and salaries.
>
> Give me a break - sounds like an overdose or PROZAC...
>
>
> > The Luddites weren't quite right. Technology doesn't necessarily
> > displace workers. First, it lowers workers' ability to demand higher
> > earnings. Computer scanners, for instance, de-skilled grocery cashiers,
> > so their earnings haven't kept pace.
>
> Did it ever occur to whomever wrote this article that clerks in a
> grocery store may be able to do more than just check the price of a
> grocery item and then punch it into a highly complex machine called
> a cash register?
>
> Do they have a clue that one employee can lose a %50,000 lifetime
> customer just by their sloppy attitude in a checkout line?
>
> Perhaps customer service could be ingrained into their very being and
> actualy cause the customer to smile when they leave instead of grumble
> about the prices.
>
> > Indeed, one of the ironies today
> > is how the Vice President can keep talking about fostering computers, on
> > the one hand, and then explaining how American families have seen their
> > real incomes erode over the past 10 years, as if he were a cybernetic
> > Lois Lane, `galactically stupid' and thus totally unable to draw the
> > connection." (Telecommunications Policy Review 27 Aug 95 p3)
> > (from EDUPAGE, 9/3/95)
>
> The above comment is a big clue of things to come - the paradigm shift
> happened in the mid-eighties...not in the last 18 months with the
> Internet and the WWW...but we still have people "whine and cheesing"
> about evolution in the marketlplace and how everything is so unfair...
>
> They should be concerned about how to add value to their products and
> services so that they can remain viable.
>
> It simply does no good to suggest that technology changes are bad in
> that we are losing low skilled worker jobs...really this was the point
> of the whole industrial revolution - keep the worker from doing mundane
> tasks - use tools and technology to make the worker MORE productive and
> provide more free time...problem is:
>
> * we haven't trained people to be self-sufficient in school,
>
> * we haven't trained them to how to develop a work ethic that places
> results above union contract breaks
>
> * we haven't puts the customer first and profits second (which is a
> paradox in itself - since whenever you do that, profits come back
> real strong anyway)
>
> * we don't teach in school how to add value to the environment...
>
> * We don't encourage people to keep learning new skills ON THE JOB.
>
> People that complain about the earlier topic are frankly,
> irresponsible...get a clue, if you aren't adding value - in the CURRENT
> marketplace - what exactly are you doing?
>
> Where does it say you have the right to stop learning after you leave
> school?
>
> Where does it say that you are guaranteed a right to some mundane low
> skilled job regardless of how negatively it impacts a business?
>
> Shall I go on?
>
> Other than that I have no strong feelings on the subject...
>
> Jerry Carleo
> Director - Pueblo County Information Systems
> Pueblo, CO
> http://www.usa.net/pueblo/
> ics@usa.net