Leaders Can Alleviate Jobless Concerns with Respect to Automation

I attended an Association of Supply Chain Management (ASCM) LinkedIn webinar yesterday [1]. One of the experts mentioned that he worried the strike would take some time because one of the demands was no automation [2]. I believe I made an obvious comment. To alleviate the concern about automation, which is manufacturing execution systems (MES) and a part of smart manufacturing technologies [3], the strikers should be guaranteed retraining, education, and employment. I also mentioned that leadership needs to emphasize that automation is a national security issue concerning ports--based on my past employment with the US FDA.

"We got to keep fighting automation and semi-automation," ILA’s leader, Harold Daggett, told a group of workers during the strike outside the Maher terminal in Elizabeth, New Jersey, as they held signs reading "Machines don't feed families" and "Fight automation, save jobs." [2]

"Last year, more than 7,300 workers went on strike in Vancouver as automation became a sticking point with the BCMEA. The ILWU sought to include language in contracts about training workers to repair new machinery introduced at the ports." [2]

As we know, productivity can be measured by labor from personnel, the number of machines used, etc., as input, while output would be services or products [3]. Research from union workers (ILWU) contradicts a report by PMA. The union workers emphasized 392 jobs were replaced by automation in the Long Beach Terminal between 2020 and 2021, while the PMA reported that paid hours had increased by as much as 31.5% since automation began in the year of 2016. To me, this is an apples-and-oranges comparison by PMA [2].

As we know from experience and our text [3], automation has increased productivity in the USA. Also, we know that 90% of USA jobs are within the service industry. Is it likely that jobs were lost, but service on sensors could have increased since 2016? Is it likely that more jobs became contract jobs fulfilled by technicians who serviced sensors, etc., through outsourcing?

If so, should leadership recognize current workers' loyalty and productivity and emphasize that their hard work, attention to detail, and productivity without automation are valued in the commissioning, installation qualification, operation qualification, performance qualification, and process qualification of automated systems? In other words, it is an olive branch to alleviate concern about job loss. I am not suggesting it will be a one-for-one opportunity, but it is a start. For all others, I believe management should use some of the profits to find employees new jobs in growing industries- the green sector.

What is your opinion? I realize that executives are driven by profit, but as mentioned in our text, ethics is an integral part of business [3]. As Jack and Suzy Welch say [4], get out of the business if you don't have integrity. As a person from a low-income childhood family, I know the anxiety one feels when facing job loss. It can be the most demeaning experience to a parent when they can't support their children. So, I believe future leaders must emphasize training, education, and assistance with employment after increasing productivity with automation.

References:

1. ASCM. 2024. ILA Strike — What You Need to Know to Keep Your Supply Chain Moving, LinkedIn. ILA Strike — What You Need to Know to Keep Your Supply Chain Moving | LinkedInLinks to an external site.

2. Oladipo, D. 2024. US port strike throws spotlight on big union foe: automation, Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-port-strike-throws-spotlight-big-union-foe-automation-2024-10-04/Links to an external site.

3. Krajewski, L. (2021). Operations Management: Processes and Supply Chains (13th ed.). Pearson Education (US). https://bookshelf.vitalsource.com/books/9780136860549Links to an external site.

4. Welch, Jack; Welch, Suzy. Winning: The Ultimate Business How-To Book, HarperCollins. Kindle Edition.