Vernon- not much in that clip provoked thought or scared me.
How about the economic impact of the population growth in India and China - it's already responsible for the hike in scrap metal prices and making the theft of copper cabling from the rails ways a lucrative crime. There will be conflict over access to natural resources and the like.
I understand that there is such a thing as changes and progress however, I don't feel that mechanisation and introductions of new technology are justifications to cut posts where people are still needed.
Anecdotal evidence from an ex-steel worker in Sheffield suggests that mechanisation and new technologies do justify the need to cut posts - apparently, despite the huge job losses in the Sheffield - steel production is higher than it's ever been. He might be wrong. I have no means of verifying his story. If it is true how do you justify paying a large part of the workforce to be idle.
Modernisation is an interesting one but these things should make life easier but does it really?
It depends on how one defines 'making life easier'
Does it allow people to properly engage with each other - slightly ironic in that I type this on an online forum but is that engaging in it's truest sense? Or are human interactions masked by an online filter? Don't doubt me, I am part of the computer generation but it should not be at a cost to the quality of life. It should enhance/partner, should we become slaves to the progress determined by changes or progress? The automated button pressing call centre is an example of how technology is unhelpful, indifferent and downright frustrating.
It's even worse for the hapless employees whose work rates and down times are monitored electronically. Lots of things that I used to do face to face are now depersonalised - online purchasing, online banking, registering complaints etc. In many respects I see these as liberating - I don't have to queue to buy things, I can purchase at any time it suits me. I can raise loans and pay bills without the tedium of having to go to the psot office/bank/utility company offices (when did anyone last pay a bill at a gas showroom or the leccy board?)
Does it take us less time to do a task - does it mean that our working or personal lives are less hurried and stressful? Not necessarily, people hold onto phones/devices that enable them to check work/check emails etc when do people stop? When do people draw the lines at working?When do people switch off an relax?
Yes it does take less time to do tasks. When I compare my leisure time with that of my parents' generation, I am not enslaved by the time consuming tasks with restricted choices that dominated their out of work time. Phones and computers to check work related communications? Not on your nelly! I am a teacher and work on site until my tasks are completed. I do not check emails or do any work related tasks until peak examination assessment time and even then it's restricted to marking.
I disagree Vernon that justifications for loss of jobs in teaching and water companies.
I can't speak for the water companies but the how has teaching improved? It's become even more target driven, paperwork heavy and the teachers feel that less time is given to teaching. Sometimes the quality and aim of an objective gets missed - not everything in life can be measured in a quantative way.
I had a summer job with Yorkshire Water to cut grass. There was a drought. The grass didn't grow and there was nothing for me to do. Because my contract was to cut grass, the management were not allowed by the union to ask me to do anything else until the bizarre compromise of me being asked to create a lawn from scratch and tend it to give my replacement some grass to cut in early autumn. Such practices were rife and the full time workers rarely did more than three hours work per shift - the rest of the time was taken up with preparation time - preparing to walk to the work site. Preparing/washing before walking back to the canteen. preparing washing before going back to the work site. Preparing/washing before lunch. etc. Even as an alleged member of the lazy student population, I found the situation wasteful and at time frustrating - I actually wanted to work and was sometimes castigated by the full time workers for working too hard!
I never suggested that teaching has improved through job losses. There was a lot of surplus teachers caused by a drop in pupil numbers. When combined with delegated budgets, schools simply could not afford to employ surplus staff as they did not have alternative pots of money to dip into to pay them. Local Education authorities buried their heads in the sand and hoped that the problem would go away but finally bit the bullet and funded enhanced retirement packages and as a last resort redundancies. I totally agree that quantitative assessment isn't the be all and end all. I wanted to strangle a deputy head teacher who delivered a "Know your pupils through data" presentation. I'd rather know my pupils through conversation. A retired pal of mine accurately summed up the feelings of futility with all of the data gathering that we are charged with: "You don't fatten pigs by weighing them".
Were are living in difficult times. Those of us in permanent employment are fortunate. I am not so confident that my offspring will enjoy as settled and secure a life as I have had. The Shift Happen presentation is not as 'in your face' as I'd like it to be.
