employment rights Thompsons, IER Employment Law Update 10 October - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

employment rights
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

employment rights Thompsons, IER Employment Law Update 10 October - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Automation and (the future of) employment rights Thompsons, IER Employment Law Update 10 October 2018 @ewanmcg ~ ewan.mcgaughey@kcl.ac.uk School of Law, KCL ~ CBR, Cambridge Three main arguments (1) Claims of mass unemployment from


slide-1
SLIDE 1

Automation and (the future of) employment rights

Thompsons, IER Employment Law Update 10 October 2018 @ewanmcg ~ ewan.mcgaughey@kcl.ac.uk School of Law, KCL ~ CBR, Cambridge

slide-2
SLIDE 2

Three main arguments

(1) Claims of mass unemployment from automation are evidence-free

(2) Full employment is achievable with active social policy

(3) Sustainable, fair and full employment requires labour to take back its votes in capital, and democratise the economy

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

(1) Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook (2017)

‘... technology and automation are eliminating many jobs’

We ‘should explore ideas like universal basic income to give everyone a cushion to try new things.’ $64.4bn

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Elon Musk, Tesla (2017)

⚫‘Twenty years is a short period

  • f time to have something like

12-15 percent of the workforce be unemployed...’

⚫A basic income is ‘going to be

necessary’ because there ‘will be fewer and fewer jobs that a robot cannot do better.’ $15.7bn

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

Op-ed in Washington Post, owned by Jeff Bezos, Amazon (2015)

‘Sorry, but the jobless future isn’t a luddite fallacy’.

A billionaire narrative is emerging: mass unemployment is inevitable, it requires basic income. Right? $83.4bn

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

Technological unemployment?

JM Keynes (1930) said he was seeing ‘tech unemployment’ but it was an opportunity to reduce working time: 15 hour week by 2030.

Frey and Osborne (2013) ‘47 per cent of total US employment’ is ‘potentially’ at risk from automation ‘over some unspecified number of years’. Claim went viral. Citigroup soon funded.

Grace et al (2017) robots will replace most human functions, and write a best-selling book by 2049. Funding from Facebook guy.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

The “Machine Learning Experts”

⚫ Frey and Osborne’s

claim (2013-2017) of 47% of US jobs going

  • ver “some

unspecified number of years” came from surveying other “experts”: Frey and Osborne say “we subjectively hand- labelled 70

  • ccupations, assigning

1 if automatable, and 0 if not’ by ‘eyeballing’ different tasks.

⚫ My Canterbury Tales study, which I conducted by “eyeballing”

different tasks, suggests that in 631 years, only 46% of jobs have actually gone. I would argue my study is more credible, because I have one thing Frey + Osborne don’t: evidence.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

(2) Full employment was a consensus for 30 years

n.b. Beveridge (1944) full employment is all hours one needs ‘at fair wages’ (not ZHCs underemployment). Consensus ended with ‘natural’ u/e theory.

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

Unemployment is not technological or natural, but political.

From Eisenhower in 1952, Democrat employment score = +12.05%. Republican score = –14.05%.

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10

Social policy can achieve full employment, despite mass shocks

In UK, post-WW2, 21.5m total labour force, 5.2m in armed forces, 3.8m in armed force production. That is 42% of the labour force actually faced redundancy immediately not in ‘unspecified’ years

MoR, Employment Policy (1944) Cmd 6527, public investment would shift back or forth in 5 year terms against private + international volatility

Disabled Persons (Employment) Act 1944, large companies had to take quotas of disabled veterans

Distribution of Industry Act 1945, to spread jobs to ‘Development Areas’

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11

But why is private/international investment volatile?

⚫ MC Eccles, Beckoning Frontiers (1951) 75, ‘idle or

hoarded funds interrupt the flow of national income and result in a depression’, so the US needed a ‘better distribution of the current income’.

⚫ In 2016, top 5 US firms alone held $504bn in cash –

enough to fully employ all of the currently 6m unemployed people in the US for 4 years on $10p/h

⚫ To invest and reduce inequality, corporations and asset

  • wners must pay their fair share of tax (though full

employment actually cost very little: Matthews (1968))

⚫ Also, pre-tax income must be equally distributed. Relying

  • nly on govt, makes society vulnerable to political shift.
slide-12
SLIDE 12

12

Without voice at work, inequality soars

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Labour’s capital was set to dominate the whole stock market, till voice at work was destroyed

slide-14
SLIDE 14

(3) Sustainable full employment?

Three proposals:

(i) RB Freeman, ‘Who owns the robots rules the world’ (2015) advocated huge employee share schemes.

Problem is that, like in Enron, employee share schemes concentrate risk in a way no prudent investor wants. Share investment requires diversification of risk.

slide-15
SLIDE 15

(ii) NEF, IPPR and John McDonnell’s speech: create ‘Inclusive Ownership Funds’ - 10% of shares in companies w/250+ staff transfer to workers. They become non-tradable. Workers get governance rights, and receive dividends up to £500 p.a. The surplus goes to the Treasury. Right aims but problematic because:

dividends will stop, co’s will do share-buybacks.

corporate tax easier to boost Treasury receipts.

to raise wages, collective bargaining is better, and much more than £500 a year.

Labour also proposes 1/3 worker-directors: good.

(3) Sustainable full employment?

slide-16
SLIDE 16

(3) Sustainable full employment

(iii) Manifesto for Labour Law ch 5 proposes

all companies register workers as members with a minimum of 20% of votes in the general meeting by default. No need for shares. This becomes a legal right over 250 staff (amendable by Minister, pro-worker).

workers get 1/2 representation in all pensions. Asset managers must follow instructions: so labour takes back, not 10% of capital, but the whole stock market.

slide-17
SLIDE 17
slide-18
SLIDE 18
slide-19
SLIDE 19
slide-20
SLIDE 20

20

Phillips (1958) correlated fuller employment and rising wages But Friedman (1968) like Hayek (1950) argued the same goes for all inflation + there is a natural rate of unemployment. Guy Standing (2017) ch 9, 225-6, ‘most economists accept’ this.

slide-21
SLIDE 21

21

The random non-correlation of unemployment + inflation If production expands, wages can rise without inflation: everyone will be better off.

slide-22
SLIDE 22

22

slide-23
SLIDE 23

23

slide-24
SLIDE 24

24

slide-25
SLIDE 25

25

Demobilisation: WW1 and WW2

slide-26
SLIDE 26

26

Mass horse unemployment: 1915 to 1960 (i.e. 45 years) horse jobs drop 88%. But human job loss will probably not be like horse job loss: humans write law, not horses. Long may this continue.

slide-27
SLIDE 27

27

slide-28
SLIDE 28

28

slide-29
SLIDE 29

29

slide-30
SLIDE 30

30

slide-31
SLIDE 31
slide-32
SLIDE 32
slide-33
SLIDE 33
slide-34
SLIDE 34
slide-35
SLIDE 35
slide-36
SLIDE 36
slide-37
SLIDE 37
slide-38
SLIDE 38
slide-39
SLIDE 39
slide-40
SLIDE 40