[ad_1]
The concept of "work for life" seems like a distant dream for most people in 2019.
After all, the economy of the show is growing at a staggering rate; It is estimated that 57 million people in the United States and 1.1 million people in the United Kingdom rely on flexible and short-term jobs to pay their bills.
This should increase. By 2035, most of us will be doing work without the security of long-term contracts, and each of our movements will be monitored at work through billions of Internet of Things (IoT) devices.
You might also like:
– Why do airlines lengthen their journeys by design?
– How to know if you are about to exhaust yourself
– A double-edged sword for migrants
This is the bleak vision of a report from the Royal Society to Promote Arts, Industry and Commerce (RSA), designed to highlight the challenges and opportunities that our future could offer. And that is already becoming a reality.
"I had to log in [to software] At the beginning and end of my shift, report all breaks, including those to go to the bathroom, "says Sara McIntosh, a former employee of an online retailer. "They counted the number of investigations I had done in a day on their system, and then divided them by the number of hours worked minus the breaks to check that I had reached my goal daily."
According to a report by the Trades Union Congress (TUC), most British workers (56%) believe they are currently being spied on at work.
Most British workers (56%) think they are currently being spied at work – TUC
This ranges from using the Internet to keystrokes and monitored webcams, to verifying their location and identity with the help of portable devices and technology. facial recognition.
The TUC report gives the example of a construction worker named Barry, who has "taken jobs for which we do not use a timesheet." Instead, they take our fingerprint. It skips a process, but I feel it's an invasion of privacy. "
The RSA report envisions four scenarios in 2035, one of which is called "precision economy". The authors chose 2035 because it seemed far enough to stretch people's imagination, but close enough to allow for easy speculation about the possibilities.
"2035 will probably be as familiar but different," said Asheem Singh, director of economics at RSA. He explains that the four scenarios in the report are designed to provide tools to see where the future might go and avoid a nightmarish vision of the future. The precision economy scenario is not necessarily more likely than the other three, but it is the most troubling.
Gig economy 2035
In the precision economy scenario, companies will be able to use real-time data collected by sensors to allocate resources efficiently. This will enable them to adopt work-on-demand strategies, with concert work models becoming the norm in the health and retail sectors by 2035. In addition, the proliferation of sensors will allow companies to analyze each movement of their workers. Thus, in retail, in-store sensors will be used to collect traffic information, while wearable devices will be used to track the activity of staff, including idle time spent and sales conversions . Managers will use this data to reward or punish workers, who will be given a star rating based on data and ratings.
Singh says this worrying scenario already exists in the form of time sheets and monitoring devices monitoring workers in warehouses and call centers.
Bethia Stone worked in a public relations agency using a timesheet software to record activities in blocks of 15 minutes, 30 minutes or one hour, which required employees to work more and more overtime. to create an "anxious and stressful atmosphere". She also had experience supervising work as a student when she was working in a supermarket with productivity measures on the crates. "I had to digitize a certain number of items a minute, and if you fell below, you would be considered to have an unsatisfactory performance and you could be disciplined."
I had to scan a number of articles by the minute and if you fell below you would be considered to have an unsatisfactory performance and you could be sued for disciplinary action – Stone
Singh says that these types of surveillance are increasing. "As work becomes more and more disparate and workers change jobs, employers demand more. It is not so much the connection as the connection, and it poses serious problems in terms of privacy, well-being, autonomy and the challenge of feeling human in an increasingly mechanized world. "
Surveillance systems could be supported by workers who believe they will benefit from performance-related pay, better opportunities for progression and "crackdown on their colleagues who practice free riding", suggests the report.
"The 1984 novel scenario is about the ultimate logical end of the precision economy: a world in which the world of work but also the political and personal worlds are calibrated and controlled," says Singh. He believes that technology could accelerate this process, if we allow it.
Winners and losers
The market economy is designed to allow employers to adjust their labor force according to the demand for goods and workers to choose the jobs they perform flexibly. But if it sounds good in theory, there are disadvantages. Keith Bender, a professor of economics at the University of Aberdeen, says companies lose the loyalty of their employees, who may be forced to give concerts at zero hours without any job security.
While typical zero-hour contracts are currently poorly paid, exclusive platforms will emerge in the future, the report predicts. This would polarize the mass-market economy into desirable work for high-performing and empathic individuals, while other desperate workers would be directed to discouraging work such as moderating content on social media.
On-demand workers – nurses or doctors – enjoy a better work-life balance because they will be able to charge more for unusual work hours. And some workers can take cognitive enhancing drugs to improve their performance under the constant supervision of employers.
In the precision economy scenario, young workers will find it easier to navigate this environment and sometimes climb the ladder of their career. But this will be to the detriment of older and less flexible colleagues.
There is an argument that young people do not value privacy as older generations, so maybe young people will also be in danger – Bender
Bender wonders if it is the elderly who will lose. "The stereotype is that older generations do not follow technology as well as young people, but there is an argument that young people do not value privacy as older generations, so maybe young people will also in danger. "
Whether he is young or old, he thinks that the more affluent people will be able to protect themselves from a less stable work situation as they have more money.
Singh agrees, arguing that we risk creating a two-tier system of "monitoring inequality" in which those with the means and the right workplaces to demand better conditions do so, while those who can not suffer. It is therefore likely that many workers will be left on their own for poorly paid work.
Brain drain
"If we engage in a widespread entertainment market economy, we will have to fundamentally rethink," said Bender. For example, the NHS and other health care providers should probably devote more resources to helping people with mental health problems because the lack of job security is stressful.
Public relations officer Stone says that although no one has ever criticized her hours, it was the fact that she knew she could be examined which was stressful. "During times of stress, we still had to worry. It is in the back of your mind that your supervisor might think you are underperforming. "
If we got up or talked we were constantly watching, we felt like being in jail
Surveillance can also break trust in the workplace. The emails and messages from Carly Thompsett sent to another colleague were read by her employer while she was working as an administrative assistant in a sales team. "This created a tension between us and the officials because we felt like we were treated like children." The monitoring also continued offline. "If we got up or talked, we were constantly being watched, we felt like we were in jail."
"This type of surveillance presents an Orwellian disconcerting aspect to the extent that every movement of an employee can potentially be monitored and analyzed in ways that workers do not control and that they do not know how to do it." employer may use the information obtained arbitrarily. ", Says Theodosius.
He warned that ongoing monitoring would prevent employees from controlling any aspect of their work life, which would result in a low and high stress level. These working conditions would significantly harm the workforce, mentally and physically.
They do not know how the employer can use the information obtained arbitrarily.
"While employee monitoring contains positive arguments such as safety and performance recognition, it appears that it is often implemented in ways that increase stress while reducing the autonomy and dignity of employees. employees, "said Naomi Climer, vice president Royal Academy of Engineering.
A social contract
The market economy has already been criticized for making the poorest in society even more vulnerable. With the addition of hypersurveillance technology, the ultimate results will depend on governments, labor organizations and unions that will put in place the regulatory framework needed to protect those at risk.
Singh says we need a new social contract or a 21st century safety net to allow anyone to prosper and prosper. "And the 2.0 welfare system will have to be as imposing and bold as the Beveridge vision that created the welfare state more than seven decades ago."
Just as Winston Smith confronts Big Brother in 1984, David Spencer, director of economics at Leeds University Business School, believes that there will be resistance to hypersurveillance that will limit its impact. "In the end, we have the choice as to the evolution of technology."
Singh gives some examples of these choices: "We must tell our employers, collectively, that it is not acceptable to label warehouse workers. We should insist that human rights legislation be rethought in the era of precision surveillance, "he said.
"We need to organize more and more innovatively to make sure our voices are heard. We need forums to deliberate on ethical automation and AI, and we need to share and denounce bad practices and bring government and business to our side. "
So, freedom does not necessarily mean slavery, and perhaps we could stop Big Brother from looking at us too much … if we pay attention.
To comment on this story or anything you've seen on BBC Capital, visit our website. Facebook contact us or send us a message on Twitter.
If you liked this story, sign up for the weekly features of bbc.com bulletin called "If you only read 6 things this week". A selection of BBC Future stories, Culture, Capital and Travel hand-proposed in your inbox every Friday.
[ad_2]
Source link