Skip to main content

How not to get replaced by machines

Image
By

I was not exaggerating in my previous article when I discussed how "machines are now replacing humans in service jobs." If it is still difficult to convince you, here is an additional example: "Meet Sally, the robot who makes perfect salads." This machine specializes in only one menu item — salad — yet it can do a better job than most chefs. For example:
  • It can make salads within 60 seconds.
  • It makes salad with perfect proportions, even with accurate calorie counts.
  • It can create more than 1,000 salads from the 21 ingredients stored inside the machine.
  • Those 21 ingredients can be changed over time, making it possible for the machine to create even more salads.
  • It weighs 350 pounds.
  • It has a price tag of $30,000, but can also be leased for $500 a month.
"What? A machine that costs over $10,000? That is too expensive, especially when we consider the high maintenance fees associated with the machines. There is no way that restaurants would use such expensive machines to replace real humans at work." — That was one comment I received from my previous discussion.
Actually, $30,000 is not that expensive if we do the math.
Let's say a restaurant pays a cook $15 an hour ($15 an hour will soon become the minimum wage). Let's also assume the restaurant does not pay any benefits for this cook, even though an employer would usually pay over 30 percent on top of a staff person's base salary as benefits.
Thus, $30,000 is equivalent to 2,000 working hours for this chef ($15 x 2,000 = $30,000). If a full-time cook works eight hours a day or 40 hours a week, those 2,000 working hours are equivalent of 50 weeks of work for one cook (40 x 50 = 2,000).
Because a machine can work 16 hours a day without a break (two shifts), as compared to eight hours a day for a cook, those 50 weeks of work for one cook are now shortened into 25 weeks (if two cooks are replaced by the machine) (80 x 25 = 2,000).
In fact, a machine can work seven days a week without any holiday pay, meaning it can work for 112 hours a week (16 x 7 = 112). Then, it will only take 17.86 weeks, or 4.5 months for the restaurant to get the initial investment back (2,000 / 112 = 17.86; 17.86 / 4 = 4.46).
What do you think now? Does $30,000 still sound expensive to you? Most of all, when machines are put to work, there involves no recruiting or training cost, and machines will never call in sick or want to quit.

So, what can we do if we do not want to get replaced by machines?

If you are with me and convinced that most manual labor will be replaced soon, it is now time for us to make plans for the future. My suggestions include:
Strive to be a leader in the field
People can demonstrate their leadership potentials with a progressive career path on their resumes or through the leadership responsibilities they take in professional or student organizations.
Leaders are visionaries and focus on the big things in life. Leaders set good examples for others, but at the same time, they understand the art of delegation. Leaders inspire others and grow with their team. No matter how good they are, leaders never stop learning.
Focus on transferable skills
We need to develop transferable skills, such as leadership, critical thinking and analytical skills, as well as effective communication skills, in addition to the technical skills taught in class or learned at work. The content we learn in class or the ways people do business may change or get updated quickly, but those transferable skills will stay with us throughout our career.
Do whatever it takes to be irreplaceable
The attributes for being irreplaceable may include:
What else can we do so that we will not be replaced by machines at work? Any suggestions?
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Is It OK for Hotel Staff to Wear Piercings and Tattoos?

By
Time has changed. I see more and more college students wearing piercings and tattoos nowadays, but is it OK for hotel staff to wear piercings and tattoos? The answer is “no, no, no.” According a report at USAToday.com, customers across the board do not want to see any hotel workers with pierced eyebrow, pierced tongue, tattooed arm, or nose ring. Some may argue that tattooed and pierced workers may seem more acceptable in edgy boutique hotels as compared to the big franchised hotels, but the survey results did not find any differences among a variety of lodging products. Many respondents believe people who wear visible tattoos and piercings are taking a high risk of their professional lives. If you stay in a hotel, do you mind being served by tattooed and/or pierced staff? What if you are the one who makes the hiring decision? References: USAToday.com: http://tinyurl.com/linchikwok08042010 Picture was downloaded from http://tinyurl.com/linchikwok08042010P
28 comments
Read more

Where Coffee Meets Culture: My Experience with Orientation, Socialization, and Culture at Dutch Bros (by Karina Martinez)

By
When people think of Dutch Bros, they usually picture colorful drinks, loud music, free stickers, and baristas so friendly they’ll jump in the car with you.  As someone who has had the opportunity to work for Dutch Bros, I can say that the energy customers feel isn’t an act; it is the result of intentional and effective HR practices that are focused on orientation, socialization, and culture. From your very first day, you experience how these practices shape the entire Dutch experience.  Orientation, Socialization, Culture   In HR management, orientation is the introduction of the role and company to new hires. This is intended to help them feel welcomed and informed. Socialization goes beyond the initial training process; it’s how new hires grasp the organization’s values, behaviors, and traditions over time. Together, these fun...
5 comments
Read more

Average/Below-Average Looking People Can Earn as Much as the Attractive Ones

By
Research has shown that attractive people can not only charm interviewers (and thus get hired easier), they are also more likely to earn more as compared to those with average or below-average looks. Accordingly to a Wall Street Journal report , attractive people can earn 3% - 4% more than a person with below-average look. If such difference adds up over a person’s lifetime, an attractive person can earn up to $230,000 more than an ugly worker; even an average-looking person can make $140,000 more. Another relevant Wall Street Journal report also suggests that workers who exercise regularly can earn 9% more than those who do not. If that is the fact (I believe it is), is it legal? Can employers do that? Linchi Kwok and Otto @SyracuseU Career Fair To my knowledge, no law or regulation under EEOC (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) considers a person’s look as a protective class. It is true that people in general have an idea of what kind of person they feel attract...
33 comments
Read more