General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsAI's Impact on Europe's Job Market: A Call for a Social Compact

The European Union must urgently address AIs profound impact on employment, income, and social cohesion by forging a dedicated AI Social Compact.
https://www.socialeurope.eu/ais-impact-on-europes-job-market-a-call-for-a-social-compact

While the societal ramifications of artificial intelligence are just beginning to emerge, the European Unions current policy approach appears ill-equipped to anticipate the forthcoming significant disruption to the labour market. Over the past year, Brussels has predominantly concentrated on balancing the regulation of AIs risks with accelerating its adoption. However, it has largely overlooked the deeper structural impacts this technology will have on jobs, income security, and territorial cohesion. As the European Commission now shapes its long-term agenda, particularly with the initial presentation of its 2028-2034 Multiannual Financial Framework, it is increasingly evident that the social dimension of the AI transition is not yet being treated with the urgency it demands.
AI adoption is progressing rapidly, and the risk of job displacement is swiftly becoming a reality. Historically, all forms of technological innovation have been associated with an augmentation effect the idea that technology enhances worker productivity and creates new roles, often offsetting job losses through increased demand and rising incomes. However, as has been repeatedly observed, this process is neither immediate nor painless and may, in fact, be shifting in this new era of AI adoption. A landmark 2022 study by Nobel laureate Daron Acemoglu and co-authors found that while AI adoption initially boosted AI-related hiring, it soon led to reduced hiring and shifting skill requirements within firms. This provides early evidence that the substitution effect may begin to outweigh the income effect in AI-exposed sectors. Acemoglu and his co-authors also found, in a separate study, that income inequality has increased as a result of automation, underscoring how unequal and skill-biased the impact of AI is likely to be on the job market.
Since then, generative AI has dramatically accelerated the pace and scale of automation. McKinsey reports that the share of firms using AI in at least one business function rose from 20 percent in 2017 to 78 percent in 2024, driven largely by the explosion in generative AI tools. Adoption of generative AI alone surged from 33 percent to 71 percent between 2023 and 2024. Tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini, and Claude are no longer confined to narrow applications; these models offer firms a comprehensive solution for deploying them in a wide range of basic cognitive tasks with minimal human oversight. While macro-level labour market data in advanced economies is not yet showing widespread signs of an AI-related slowdown, it appears that junior white-collar positions are beginning to feel the pressure. Tech giants including Microsoft, Meta, Apple, Amazon, and Salesforce are either freezing hiring or laying off white-collar workers, particularly young software developers in the UK and US. Specifically, software developer jobs have decreased by 35 percent over the past five years.
The Looming Unemployment Shock
However, especially in Europe, it is clear that this is only the beginning. In May, Dario Amodei, CEO of Anthropic, issued a stark warning: generative AI models like those his company develops could eliminate up to half of all entry-level white-collar jobs and push unemployment up by 10 to 20 percent within just one to five years. Despite the urgency of this projection, it appears to be largely unheeded. So far, very little is being done to prepare for a transformation that, even in its most conservative estimate, would lead to an unemployment shock not seen since the height of the eurozone crisis, when joblessness in the euro area peaked at 12 percent in 2013.
snip

SWBTATTReg
(25,527 posts)contract programmers/developers for an inhouse project, I was quoted something like $400 an hour or so, and I seem to remember even higher rates, at rates that even I couldn't believe back then.
I even considered switching jobs to one of these higher paying jobs, somewhat still regret it, but overall, in the Industry/company I was in, I did do quite a bit of original programming and development, brand new in the world, even established some preliminary standards for data traffic (as opposed to voice data, at that time more than 99% of all traffic over networks). So I was happy I stayed.
Most of my software development work was done in interconnecting computer networks, training programmers in COBOL, PLI, and many other languages too numerous to list here, Job Control Language, Utilities, training, as well as maintaining some reporting systems and establishing standards on various programming items, such as the proper construction of software and its various components to ensure that all was documented thoroughly (you would be amazed at how many programmers 'forgot' to do this last but most important step). A job which at the time, was on the leading edge of the incoming Data Revolution back in the 1970s/1980s/and so on.
The point I want to emphasize here, is that I have seen these doom and gloom predictions pop up over the last 45 years I've been in the industry, and none of them have really panned out to be the doom and gloom scenario that so many predicted over the years.
Reasoning? It costs too much for a whole series of industries, that depend on IT infrastructure to process their bills, their internal infrastructure, their sheer number of reports, their manufacturing processes, and so on (the list is endless) to change everything all at once. Literally untold $billions of dollars if not more. Like the old saying when newer programming languages popped up and some said it was the end of COBOL back then, no, it wasn't. Businesses back then had a huge cost embedded in their COBOL platforms and they weren't just about to throw it all away. Maybe implement small chunks of new code for meaningful chunks of the Business Enterprises.
And the higher paying jobs, maybe at first they're high, but eventually the labor markets will catch up and the jobs and pay will somewhat stablize.
That's my two cents.
SickOfTheOnePct
(8,196 posts)...is that using generative AI, it will no longer take years and billions of dollars to replace old, inefficient code.
To, AI isn't my grandfather's Oldsmobile, that is, it isn't just a the normal vector of tech innovation...it's tech innovation on steroids.
SWBTATTReg
(25,527 posts)Oftentimes, just defining what one (or a group) wants is not easy to define.
SickOfTheOnePct
(8,196 posts)The requirements process in normal software development isn't the most time consuming part of development - that would be the design, coding, regression testing, etc. When that piece is automated, the overall development time is slashed.
Now add on the ability of AI to see what the existing system does (processes, calculations, interfaces) and there is little to no need for human intervention in the requirements gathering process. This of course is assuming that the goal is to replace old, less efficient code with modern code.
Either way, using AI reduces/eliminates many of the challenges that humans cause in the software development process.