Skip to main content

Robots, Your Job, and the Future

On Twitter, I often link to articles about how robots are replacing humans in various jobs. This isn't something I like talking about. It's terrible for those being replaced. But it is a fact, and that's why I do it.

We are in the early stages of a radical change in how companies provide services and produce or sell goods. It is scary for workers, but the change has started, and it's not going to stop, and if you can be replaced by a robot, you will be.

Those people protesting outside McDonald's headquarters in Chicago, wanting a $15/hour minimum wage and the right to unionize? They're organizing battles in a war they've already lost. McDonald's isn't going to give you $15/hour. McDonald's will just replace you with robots, and it's already working on it.

(Frankly, the Chicago protesters strike me as more of a union-thing, more union power, more mandatory union dues, etc. But unions will decline as their members are replaced by robots. Of course, in 2012, unions killed the Hostess company, causing the loss of 18,000 jobs.)

Or let's say you get states to raise the minimum wage to $15/hour. Illinois or any state can force McDonald's to pay you $15/hour; but Illinois can't force McDonald's to keep unprofitable restaurants open. McDonald's can just close all of its restaurants in Illinois. How does that help you? You just went from $9.00/hour to no job.

Once rumblings started a few years ago about a $15/hour minimum wage for fast food workers, Wendy's said, okay, we're just going to develop self-ordering kiosks and get rid of as many human workers as we can. Wendy's is rolling them out this year.

The minimum wage for robots is $0.00/hour. Robots don't get overtime pay. Robots don't get sick, don't have babies, don't go out on FMLA leave. Robots don't take vacations. Robots don't unionize. Robots don't need medical insurance or a 401(k). The only costs are the initial building and implementing costs, and service/maintenance costs after that.

Companies like McDonald's and Wendy's, and pretty much every other company, only care about keeping costs down and maximizing profits for the owners of the company. That's how business works; that's why people create businesses, to make money, to make a profit for themselves.

Of course, as the consumer, you can always choose to buy food or products from companies that like using humans. (It feels strange writing that.) You will be paying more, but that will be your choice, provided those businesses survive.

So it's a scary time, but make no mistake, the change has started. I don't know what the future will look like, but workplaces will be much different than they are today. If you want a job in the future, it has to be a job that can't be replaced with a robot. Humans with computer, programming, coding, skills should be important, going forward, and that's what I tell my kids to study.

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Know Your Rights: New York's Consumer Protection Statute

Under New York law, there are several ways that consumers can recover damages (money) or other relief against businesses that ripped them off, deceived them, or otherwise treated them improperly. One of these ways is New York's Consumer Protection Statute (General Business Law § 349). Under GBL §349, a consumer can sue a business if he or she can show that the subject act or practice (1) was consumer-oriented; (2) was misleading in a material way; and (3) the consumer suffered injury as a result of the deceptive act. If successful, a consumer can recover their actual damages (money they lost), their reasonable attorney fees, and "treble" (triple) damages up to $1,000 (if the business acted willfully and knowingly in deceiving the consumer). The $1,000 cap on treble damages needs to be eliminated. It is no deterrent to businesses behaving badly. 
Post a Comment
Read more

Recent Cases: Appeals Court Reverses Lower Court in Slip and Fall

In a decision issued on March 18, 2015 , a New York appeals court reversed a lower court decision dismissing a slip and fall case. The plaintiff was a 12-year-old boy. He was injured when he slipped and fell on "loose and broken pieces of asphalt" as he was running towards an ice cream truck near an Ikea store in Brooklyn. There were two interesting things about the decision. First, like many slip and fall cases, the case turned on constructive notice--how long was the loose/broken asphalt on the ground before the accident so that the defendants should have seen it and corrected the dangerous condition? The appeals court said the defendants failed to show when they last cleaned or inspected the area, so they did not establish lack of constructive notice. The more interesting thing is that apparently the boy told staff at the hospital where he was taken that he tripped over his shoelaces. The defendants found this in the hospital records and basically said, "Ha! He di...
Post a Comment
Read more

Enforcing Money Judgments

Let's say you represent yourself in a lawsuit. You sue someone in small claims court or District Court, or even Supreme Court. Or you're a small firm, representing a plaintiff, and maybe the technicalities of enforcing judgments are outside of your comfort zone. The facts and the law are on your side; there was a trial or a motion, and you win your case. You are entitled to money from the defendant. Maybe you've gotten so far as a getting piece of paper signed by a judge that says "Judgment". Hooray! So then what? Now you have to actually  get your money from the defendant. That can be difficult if the person or company does not want to pay. That means the judgment will have to be enforced . And if you don't know how to enforce a judgment, your piece of paper that says "Judgment" isn't worth a whole lot, even after all the trouble you went through to win your case. That's where this office comes in. Enforcing judgments can be trick...
Post a Comment
Read more