AI-based automation of jobs could increase inequality in UK, report says
Ministers need to act in the interest of those who will be made unemployed or whose jobs dramatically change, said the report by the Institute for the Future of Work (IFOW) thinktank, in order to prevent skills shortages hitting employers and workers from suffering a decline in job satisfaction and wellbeing.
Artificial intelligence software is expected to become a widespread tool in factories, offices and in the public sector, demanding new skills, the IFOW said. However, a survey of 5,000 UK employees found 'a pervasive sense of anxiety, fear and uncertainty' about the introduction of AI technology, and what it could do to their work.
Christopher Pissarides, a Nobel prize winner in economics and the report's main author, said ministers needed to consider 'how AI can bring productivity and prosperity, without putting people under more intense stress and pressure? How can it help us identify and deliver new opportunities, without exacerbating growing divides cross the country?'
He said the three-year report, which also surveyed 1,000 businesses, discovered that while some major employers had developed tools to mitigate the effects of automation and AI to support staff, many smaller employers struggled to comprehend how they would transform the workplace and what skills and training staff would be needed in order to adapt over the next decade.
The report makes a series of recommendations, including establishing science centres – like London's Crick Institute – in regional cities to prevent the capital and the arc between Oxford and Cambridge from dominating innovations in fast-growing bio-technologies and securing a disproportionate number of high paying jobs.
Pissarides, professor at the London School of Economics, said devolving decision making to the regions would also be an important element of the reforms needed, while unions should also be given new powers of 'digital access, collective rights to information and new e-learning roles, backed by the Treasury'.
He said this would be in 'recognition of the key role of unions to deliver meaningful partnership working'.
James Hayton, professor of innovation at Warwick Business School, and a member of the report team, said the impact on jobs, skills, and job quality should not be blamed on AI, but how firms used it.
Sign up to Business Today
Get set for the working day – we'll point you to all the business news and analysis you need every morning
after newsletter promotion
'It is how firms and managers choose to implement it that is so crucial in bringing benefit to their workforce and overall productivity,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Guardian
20 hours ago
- The Guardian
The Guardian view on the Alaska summit: there must be no more gifts to Vladimir Putin
Hours after Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin departed from Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Alaska on Friday, Moscow officials reported that two more villages in Ukraine's east had been seized by Russian forces. It was a grimly apt postscript to a 'peace summit' that allowed a pariah leader to posture on the world stage, but signally failed to achieve the outcome that its host claimed to desire. Mr Trump had suggested that he would be 'unhappy' if a ceasefire were not agreed during discussions with Mr Putin. There would, he warned, be 'severe consequences' if his guest proved unwilling to end the war. Predictably, no ceasefire announcement was forthcoming, and the sanctions Mr Trump has repeatedly threatened, but never imposed, have been kicked into the long grass. Instead, the US president offered a crucial concession to Mr Putin, concurring that a cessation of hostilities should come only after a 'comprehensive' peace agreement. This was a betrayal of hollow assurances given to Kyiv and European allies by Mr Trump before the summit, and a gift to the Kremlin. As Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, prepares to meet the US president in Washington on Monday, he consequently finds himself in a deeply invidious position. According to reports, Mr Putin's core demand is that Ukraine surrenders all unoccupied territory in the Donbas region, in exchange for a supposedly permanent ceasefire. There are, of course, no good grounds to take the Russian president at his word. His references in Alaska to the 'root causes' of the war indicate that he remains determined to force Ukraine back into Moscow's orbit, and restrict its capacity to act as an independent state. A 'deal' on anything like those terms would amount to precisely the carve-up feared by Kyiv. Mr Zelenskyy cannot, should not and will not acquiesce. But having retreated from his threats to make life tougher for Mr Putin, the US president is returning to his default bullying stance towards Mr Zelenskyy. Asked what advice he would offer the Ukrainian leader, Mr Trump responded: 'Make a deal. Gotta make a deal.' The peremptory tone is worryingly reminiscent of February's notorious Oval Office meeting, when Mr Zelenskyy was told: 'You don't have the cards.' In vague terms, Mr Trump has alluded to a future US role in security guarantees following a deal. But as Ukraine fights for a viable future, he appears impatient to move on to doing lucrative future business with Moscow, and angling for a Nobel peace prize. Given that ominous backdrop, the presence of Sir Keir Starmer and other European leaders in Washington on Monday will represent a crucial counterweight. Mr Putin will attempt to force Ukraine's negotiating hand by taking more territory in the east, where Russian forces have been advancing at the fastest rate for months. Europe must ensure that, as Kyiv battles for a just peace, Mr Zelenskyy does have enough cards to play. As well as displaying solidarity in the White House, that means upping the economic pressure and military support, and urging Mr Trump to do the same. Ukraine must remain in control of the future of its own territory, and the use of force must not be rewarded by the summary redrawing of borders. With enormous bravery and skill, and at immense cost, Ukraine has resisted an illegal invasion for more than three years. There must be no sellout. Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
Economist
2 days ago
- Economist
The nightmare of a Trump-Putin pact isn't over
BEFORE HIS meeting with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, Donald Trump reportedly called Norway's finance minister to float the idea that he should win a Nobel prize once he had secured peace in Ukraine. Instead, the summit has handed Mr Putin what he wanted: a red carpet and a chance to boast that Russia's isolation is over even as he ramps up pressure on the battlefield. In return, Mr Putin provided nothing: no ceasefire, no roadmap, not even a token concession. They spoke for three hours. Little detail has emerged of what, if anything, they have agreed.
The Herald Scotland
2 days ago
- The Herald Scotland
Putin floats new nuke deal ahead of Trump summit in Alaska
But in recent weeks, Putin and Trump have both discussed the possibility of a successor deal. Nuclear threats have emanated from Moscow since 2022 when Russia started its war against Ukraine, which is the main topic of the summit. More: Live updates: Russia predicts marathon Trump-Putin Alaska summit Putin suggested the summit could create "the long-term conditions of peace between our countries ... and in the world as a whole, if we reach agreements in the field of strategic (nuclear) offensive arms control," while speaking to senior Kremlin military and civilian officials at an Aug. 14 meeting. Trump told reporters July 25 that New START's looming expiration is "a problem for the world," and expressed a desire to maintain the treaty's deployment limits. The president, who has long sought to reduce the risks of nuclear weapons, tried and failed to launch three-way nuke talks with China and Russia during his first term. A golden 'opportunity' A top arms control negotiations expert told USA TODAY the summit represents a major "opportunity" to rein in a potential arms race before it begins. Paul Dean, a former acting assistant secretary of State who oversaw arms control and led the U.S. delegation to the New START implementation body, emphasized that the treaty's enforcement measures also keep the world a safer place. Dean now leads the non-partisan Nuclear Threat Initiative's Global Nuclear Policy Program. More: 'Heed our warnings': Nobel laureates plea for diplomacy to prevent nuclear war The treaty mandates on-site inspections, data exchanges, and other measures intended to allow each side to maintain an accurate picture of the other's nuclear forces, he explained. "Without (a high) confidence level in the day-to-day picture of what the other side's nuclear forces are, what you really get is the potential for misinterpretation and miscalculation," Dean said. "And when it comes to nuclear weapons, a misinterpretation or a miscalculation can be catastrophic." The U.S. and Russia (and the Soviet Union before it) have maintained a series of such nuclear arms control and verification agreements dating back to the 1972 Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty. "Most people alive right now have never lived in a time during which there were no guardrails on the U.S.-Russia or U.S.-Soviet nuclear deterrence relationship," noted Dean. He argued that "people have forgotten what the risks are," including a potentially costly arms race. The "world that we're living in is more complicated and more dangerous than it's been in quite some time," he said. More: Despite DOGE, Pentagon escapes Donald Trump's budget cuts unscathed The presidents could agree in Anchorage to start the negotiating process for a successor deal to New START, but Dean cautioned that "these are long negotiations and unlikely to be resolved in a matter of weeks or even months." But there is potential for some immediate progress to emerge from the summit, Dean said. "Both sides could take a step back from nuclear threats and raising the nuclear temperature. Both sides could recommit themselves to implementing the New START treaty," he said, and the two sides could agree to respect the deployment limits as negotiations unfold. Contributing: Reuters Davis Winkie's role covering nuclear threats and national security at USA TODAY is supported by a partnership with Outrider Foundation and Journalism Funding Partners. Funders do not provide editorial input.
