Interesting, Arthur, but what I wonder about is whether we are still in some
kind of information age economy or whether we are in a globablized economy that
has gone flat.
Ed
----- Original Message -----
From: Arthur Cordell
To: 'Keith Hudson' ; 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Saturday, October 24, 2009 12:20 PM
Subject: [Ottawadissenters] RE: [Futurework] 65 and Up and Looking for Work
I ran across some material created years ago which I think still has
relevance to the topic. I cleaned it up a bit and posted it to a current
discussion on the future of work.
--------------------------------------------------
Future of Work and working: considerations for the New Economy
While cleaning up some old emails, I ran across this draft document which was
prepared for an international meeting.
------------------------
Mr. Chairman. We are in the midst of a fundamental
social and economic transformation whose extent and implications we only
partially grasp. In jurisdictions around the world, and in both the public and
private sectors,
the emergence of a global information society is accelerating the pace of
change and overwhelming established methods of organizing and governing that
were developed
for a world of more limited information flow, greater stability and clearer
boundaries.
All institutions, public and private, are having to come to terms with
what has been called the New Economy. It is an economy where the basic
building block is information technology. This technology is labour saving,
energy saving, and capital saving. It is also distance insensitive.
Information technology is the key ingredient
underpinning the trend to globalization.
Over two hundred years ago Adam Smith wrote his famous book about the
Wealth of Nations. He concluded that wealth was based on the division of
labour and the extent of the market. Today we can add something else to
society's ability to produce: knowledge, information and communications.
The new wealth of nations is to be found in the trillions of digital
bits of information pulsing through global networks. These are
physical/electronic manifestation of the many transactions, conversations,
voice and video messages and
programs that, taken together record the process of production, distribution
and consumption in the New Economy. It is this new process that is so
upsetting our
traditional views of the economy. The rate and pace of change brought by the
information economy is one which demands new strategies for managing and
coping.
Governments, corporations, trade unions, consumers--all of us have to adjust
to the whirlwind of change.
To cope with the rapid change we have seen large corporations and
governments alike change their basic way of doing things. Shedding labour,
adopting smart production and distribution techniques the new watchword seems to
be to develop learning organizations.
Governments urge those who are just entering the labour force to prepare
for a
career of change, a career that must include life-long learning, life-long
training.
It is in this context that I would urge this group to consider doing
some of the things we have asked our citizens to do. We seem to be expecting
things to settle down, to view the jobs crisis as a deviation from the norm.
That given enough growth, productivity and clever management of the economy, we
will enjoy a move back to full employment. And
maybe we will. Maybe we won't.
I don't know about others around this table but I carry insurance on my
car and house and other possessions hoping that the worst doesn't happen: that
I don't have a car accident, that my house doesn't burn down. But if the worst
happens, I am protected. I have a contingency plan. I have insurance.
It is my belief that we need to go beyond some of the conventional
approaches to the economy. If the New Economy is going to be so radical, so
dramatically different, carrying with it so much upheaval then it is
appropriate to ask ourselves whether the world of work is likely to be affected
as well. Whether the quantity and quality of available work in our countries
is likely to change.
So I suggest today that we take out an insurance policy on our
collective futures. That we begin to prepare a menu of responses to the New
Economy. A number of responses to a range of possible scenarios. A number of
'what if...'
situations.
For example: What if we experience economic growth but the jobs don't
increase? What has been called 'jobless growth.' Or there is growth, but the
quality of the jobs is less than we have enjoyed in the past. Or we see the
continuance of today's trend: growth in jobs at both the high and low ends with
little in the middle. Using the jargon, we see the creation of a bi-modal work
force with little prospect for
upward mobility.
The changes that so threaten society when looked at in the old way, may
lessen as we come to understand the nature of production, distribution,
employment, income distribution and consumption in the New Economy. The key
thing to adopt
a learning stance.
We should begin to study, research and hold conversations on at least
the following issues:
* The forces of change. How the New Economy differs from the old and
what this is likely to mean for the quantity and quality of work.
* Future scenarios. What if there is a 'disconnect' between growth and
jobs?
What if the future doesn't resemble the past?
* The implications of globalization on jobs in the developed world. Is
the downward pressure on
wages and benefits inevitable or is there a way to obtain upward
harmonization, so
that other countries around the world can bring to their citizens some of the
fruits of
development long enjoyed by developed countries.
* Some feel that the issue is not jobs but rather the issue is income.
You know
in the 'old days' a job was a means to an end because that is how people got
income.
In the past few decades job creation has become an end in itself because this
is how
income can be distributed. While there are many important social and
psychological
benefits in having a job--job creation can be a very costly way to distribute
income.
* If the issue is really income then perhaps we should re-visit some
areas: the
notion of basic economic security, or the negative income tax. What about the
guaranteed annual income? Perhaps the New Economy will be less about
traditional
work but more about community work. About getting that work done that is so
needed by families and communities, but work that is not rewarded by
conventional
jobs for a variety of reasons.
* Where is the money to come from to cover off the income needs of
citizens?
Well we have heard a variety of suggestions regarding new fiscal measures.
Measures more in harmony with the New Economy. Measures that address the new
productivity of information technologies. Whether it is the Tobin Tax on
global
financial transactions---which are now running at a trillion dollars a day.
Or whether
it is the 'bit tax', a turnover tax on the information highway, the
transition to a new
economy should bring with it consideration of new fiscal measures. Over 10
years ago (January 1996) a report to the European Commission from the High
Level Group of Experts recommends that the 'bit tax' be considered for
further study.
This new source of revenue, tied directly to the New Economy, would allow more
citizens to benefit from the new technologies. It might be
time to consider a sort-of gasoline tax for the information highway.
* We should learn as well why the decades long decline in the hours
worked
per week has tapered off. Years ago we used to hear about the leisure
society, about
the 25 hour work week. What happened? We all know that a shorter work week
would re-distribute the available work. What forces brought this trend to a
halt. It
should be noted that not only has this trend halted but we now see two and
three
income households running faster and faster to keep up.
* Another topic is the role of trade unions. They have played a
valuable role
in building society, in getting us to where we are today. Will that continue
in the
future? What is the role of the trade unions in the New Economy?
Dear Fellows, I have gone on for some time. The specific proposals advanced
don't have to be adopted word for word. What is important is that we undertake
to become a learning group. That we try to learn about the New Economy
and that we be prepared to change long-standing views. That the changes taking
place in the global economy may in fact turn out to be a very big opportunity
for all if we can only see events in a different way.
At a European Community meeting some years ago the then US
Ambassador to US Mission said the issues surrounding the quality and quantity
of available jobs in the New Economy will not be solved by a conference here or
a workshop there. He noted that we are facing a major change in
our economies. The change will not be easy or smooth. And that just as the
cold war took many years to resolve peacefully, so too will the transition to
the New
Economy take years of discussion, dialogue and new methods of conflict
resolution.
It is in this spirit that I urge us to try to see the future of work and
working in new ways.
My hope is that the work of the WAAS becomes part of a broader collegial
process which will help us to learn new ways of behaving,
managing and governing that are more appropriate to the new situation.
>
__._,_.___
Messages in this topic (1) Reply (via web post) | Start a new topic
Messages | Files | Photos | Links | Polls | Members | Calendar
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to
Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe Recent Activity
Visit Your Group
Give Back
Yahoo! for Good
Get inspired
by a good cause.
Y! Toolbar
Get it Free!
easy 1-click access
to your groups.
Yahoo! Groups
Start a group
in 3 easy steps.
Connect with others.
.
__,_._,__________________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
