FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Oct 31

When Will the High Tech Stock Market Surge Slow Down?

by bcurry

Here are a couple of interesting stats about American high tech companies.  Market concentration has never been greater than in past decades, as the one created by Artificial Intelligence (A.I.).  According to senior index analysts for S&P Dow Jones Indices, Nvidia alone, which makes A.I. chips, makes up more than 8 percent of the S&P 500.  Nvidia is now worth $5 trillion as it continues to consolidate power in A.I. boom.  Apple and Microsoft now top $4 trillion. Those companies combined with Meta, Amazon, Alphabet and Tesla make up more than a third of the entire index.  According to Harvard’s economic faculty, spending on data centers, which are filled with the Nvidia chips, accounted for 92 percent of the country’s gross domestic product (G.D.P.) growth in the first half of 2025.  Chip technology is a powerful technology that can be used to develop advanced weaponry and drive economic opportunity.  Companies like Microsoft and the software company Oracle are pouring hundreds of billions of dollars into building data centers for A.I.

Now the question becomes: “What is the high tech impact on main street versus wall street?”  Most analysts are concerned particularly about the impact of current and future A.I. investments on the labour market for example.  While the current situation continues to produce more millionaires and billionaires, there is already evidence that companies are looking at ways of reducing labour costs through A.I. and A.I. assisted robotics.  For example, it concerns me that Amazon has been aggressively looking to do more with less.  It also concerns me that Amazon recently announced that it was laying off 14,000 corporate employees partly due to its use of A.I.  It is further reported that Amazon spent more than $34 billion on capital expenditures in the third quarter of this year, in large part to set up data centers that power cloud computing and A.I.  It should be noted that the company’s sales totalled $180.2 billion from July through September of 2025, up 13 percent from the same time in 2024.  Profit was $21.2 billion, up a whopping 38 percent.  Furthermore, as an obvious future cost cutting initiative, the New York Times reported that Amazon’s automation team has ambitious goals to use robotics to avoid hiring more than half a million workers by 2033.

Apple’s iPhones are fuelling record sales and profit so far this year, despite raising prices on its latest iPhone and having largely avoided the A.I. arms race.  However, the company still accounts for about 6 percent of the S&P 500 index.  While Apple is not pouring billions of dollars into data centers, developing expensive A.I. systems or building its own chatbot, the company continues to collect payments from Google.  Apple also charges A.I. companies to reach iPhone customers.  Most importantly, instead of bringing its manufacturing home to the U.S., Apple shifted some production from China to India, Vietnam and Thailand.  Almost nothing is made in America, and an estimated 80 percent of iPhones are still made in China.

All said and done, some investors have questioned whether A.I. will actually increase productivity and sales.  This is the trillion dollar question given that the short-term returns have not been all that great in light of the billions of dollars of current investment capital.  Nevertheless, it’s clear that the stock markets are apparently very optimistic.  Only time will tell. 

In addition, there is still the expected negative impact on the labour market as evidenced by recently announced employee cutbacks by several high tech firms using A.I.  A.I., complemented by enhanced robotics, is seen as a tool that could replace people in many jobs, including those in white collar occupations. The jury is still out on this one.  Today, youth unemployment in North American is at its highest rate and recent college graduates in several fields, including in the computer sciences, are experiencing a great deal of difficulty in obtaining employment in their field of study.  Higher unemployment may be one of those areas on main street that would be the result of the potential direct impact of what’s happening on wall street.  Of course, the billionaires would argue otherwise.

Artificial Intelligence Artificial Intelligence Economy Labour Force US

Leave a comment »
Dec 31

Current and Future Demand for “New Collar” Workers

by bcurry

A recent article by Lora Kelly of the New York Times describes what is now referred to as “new collar” jobs. Of course, we are all familiar with what we refer to as being blue collar, white collar, pink collar and green collar.  “New collar” jobs are described as those that require advanced skills but not necessarily advanced degrees, especially in emerging high-tech fields like artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, electric vehicles and robotics.  Kelly also notes that there are real fears that workers will lose jobs to technology, especially artificial intelligence, in the coming years.  However, there are others who see numerous future opportunities for the labour force.

Even with these new technologies in what is called the new industrial revolution, there will always be a need for highly skilled workers to maintain and adapt technologies in each industry.  Conversely, while there is this emerging demand, numerous companies and governments are having trouble filling many of these new collar jobs.  This lack of supply is partly because of outdated criteria which requires that candidates have college degrees in order to apply.  Some refer to this outcome as the result of certain jobs being “overcredentialed”, resulting in employers overlooking an entire pool of qualified, available candidates.  With the speed with which technologies are evolving, many employers are now looking to finding candidates who can be trained in-house for the technical skills required to meet their current and future labour needs.

Post-secondary degrees will of course continue to be required for entry into specific occupations such as medicine, law, engineering, etc., etc.  However, we have to find alternative means to ensuring the new collar jobs can be filled in a timely and efficient manner, allowing qualified persons to have entry access.  As the future of work continues to evolve, so too do the skills that individuals and organizations need in order to succeed.  In Canada for example, the Public Policy Forum, the Diversity Institute, and the Future Skills Centre joined together in 2020 to publish Skills Next (Skills Next Series – Future Skills Centre • Centre des Compétences futures (fsc-ccf.ca), a series that explores what is working in workplaces, universities, and the labour market.  The studies examine where workers are falling through the gaps in our skills training system.  Their subsequent reports focus on one issue – such as the impact of technology in the workplace, gig work, digital skills, and barriers to employment that some marginalized groups experience – and review the existing state of knowledge and identify areas in need of additional research.

More needs to be done to determine which jobs are and will be “new collar”, as well as how the demand for skilled workers will be met.  This will require the participation and collaboration by universities, colleges, corporations, governments and research bodies to develop an elaborate set of policies to tackle the issues surrounding the evolving needs for future skills development.  There is no sector of the economy that isn’t affected by the introduction of new technologies.  As we enter a New Year, there is no better time than the present to undertake the required initiatives to meet the challenges.

Labour Force New Technologies Technological Change

Leave a comment »
Dec 5

Today’s Younger Generations Are Paying To Support Older Generations

by bcurry

The recent federal fall economic statement once again reminds Canadians that previous governments never worked out how to pay for the healthy retirement of baby boomers.  Studies note that when boomers came of age as young adults, there were seven working-age residents for every retiree.  Now in retirement, boomers want the same or better supports when there are just three workers to pay for every person over age 65. The economic update reports some $150-billion (Can) in new spending on retirees between now and 2028, with possibly many billions more to follow.  These monies will drive up tax payments from younger people for today’s retirees well beyond what those retirees paid toward seniors when they were young.  Needless-to-say, organizations representing the interests of younger workers, such as Generation Squeeze, are not at all happy with the lack of alternative funding in support of younger Canadians.  In addition, all this means that deficits are increasing, and eventually someone will have to pay for the ongoing increases in our debt load.

Yes there are more monies in the budget to lower child-care expenses and to assist in improving the housing market for potential buyers, but both are a somewhat late in happening.  The mood among younger generations isn’t all that great.  They view, and perhaps understandably, that boomers have been given greater advantages when it comes to retirement.  Canadian seniors have access to a reasonably good social security system, much of it provided through public pension plans and a progressive taxation system supporting the elderly.  In addition, Canada has a universal health care system which provides affordable health care for an aging population. 

Younger workers are faced with fewer private pension plans, which unlike the boomers makes up a major part of their retirement income.  While defined pension plans are ubiquitous in the Canadian public sector, in the private sector barely one in five employees is covered according to a 2016 study.  Most past private sector pension plans, where they exist, employ a defined contribution plan.  Increasingly, today’s defined contribution plans require that employees invest their contributions in financial markets and incur the risk as to the value of their individual investments.  Defined benefit plans on the other hand were built up within the employer-provided plan and more-or-less guaranteed an annual pension payment upon retirement as long as the person lives.  Furthermore, investment risks associated with defined benefit plans are shared among employees and employers.

Today, younger workers are also affected by past lower compensation in comparison with the increasing cost of living.  Putting monies aside as part of building up a retirement nest egg has now become more important than ever.  Even if a Canadian retires at 65 — the age an individual is eligible for the Canada Pension Plan — and lives until 90, they will effectively need to live off savings for another 25 years of their life, a prospect for which many are not prepared.  For whatever reason, many younger workers are not in a position to put away a proportion of their income towards future retirement, even though there are government taxation schemes which allow for annual contributions such as the Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) which offers equivalent tax credits.  For many workers without employer pension plans, RRSPs often represent the only means of financial planning for retirement.  For lower income groups, even setting aside monies for RRSPs can be difficult if not impossible.

According to Statistics Canada, today the average Canadian will live until age 82, with the number of centenarians — those reaching the age of 100 — continuing to grow.  In 2019, the World Economic Forum suggested that Canadians on average will outlive their retirement savings by more than 10 years.  Over more prosperous years, today’s boomers have been able to build up their wealth, housing being a major part of that wealth.  Their children may in some cases be forced to wait for access to that wealth in order to afford housing or prepare for their eventual retirement.  As a result, they will most likely have to wait for their inheritance for some time to come given the projected longer life span of today’s boomers.  No wonder the younger generation isn’t too happy about their current situation and envy older generations!

Ageism Canada Economy High Student Debt Labour Force Seniors

Leave a comment »
May 6

Child Labour Is No Longer An Issue Found Only In Third World Countries

by bcurry

In 2017, the U.S. Department of Labor released an update of its annual child labor report – representing the most comprehensive research product at that time on the state of child labour in over 130 countries worldwide.  The release included International Labor Organization (ILO) figures estimating there were still over 152 million child labourers and 25 million forced labourers worldwide.  In 2016, 23 countries, including Canada, made a significant advancement in their efforts to address child labour, more than ever before.  The former U.S. Secretary of Labor Alexander Acosta asserted that: “We must make these injustices a relic of the past.”  However, the Labor Department which is supposed to find and punish child labour violations, noted that inspectors in a dozen states said their understaffed offices could barely respond to complaints, much less open original investigations.  The same department noted dozen of cases of young migrant workers who were killed since 2017, the last year the Labor Department reported any such data.

One now has the state government of Iowa introducing a bill aimed at rolling back labour protections for children, allowing them to work longer hours and take jobs that had been previously prohibited. The measure would permit children as young as 14 to work in roofing, construction and demolition, provided they are part of educational or apprenticeship programs and a parent has granted permission for the work.  A law passed in Arkansas in March eliminated work permits and age verification requirements for workers younger than 16, and similar legislation is advancing in Missouri.  Other similar child labour proposals have been introduced in Minnesota, Ohio and Georgia.  Wisconsin legislators on Monday introduced a bill to allow children as young as 14 to serve alcohol in restaurants.

One cannot believe that Americans could justify sending 14 year olds into what are definitely considered hazardous or inappropriate workplaces, employment situations considered as too hazardous for young people in many states and countries.  For example, in Ontario, Canada, children under 14 cannot work in an industrial establishment of any kind.  Children under 15 cannot work in a factory.  Children under 16 cannot work in a logging operation, in a mine, or in construction.  We’re not talking here about delivering newspapers or helping out in a restaurant or on a farm, as long as the use machinery and tools are not included.  This does not mean that child labour doesn’t exist in Canada as recent labour standards violations and employment-related deaths and injuries have demonstrated.  Indeed, workers between the ages of 15 and 24 are more likely than any other group to suffer serious injuries, according to statistics gathered by the Workers’ Compensation Boards of Canada (WCBC).  Investigations and inquests consistently find a major cause to be the lack of proper health and safety training, especially related to younger workers.  Between 2011 and 2015, the WCBC reported that 33 young workers aged 15 to 24 died in work-related incidents.  Every year, young workers between 14 and 17 are killed or injured on the job, often in workplaces deemed to be hazardous, including roofing, construction, transportation, industrial sites, farming and forestry.

Arguing that giving 14 year olds work experience is all fine and dandy, but not when it comes to potentially risking their lives.  I have dozens of examples over the years where preventable workplace tragedies happened involving young workers, especially in hazardous workplaces.  14 year olds should be in school until such time they are mature enough to take on certain employment opportunities.  There is no place in a modern and ethical society which places children in unsafe conditions, most often for the purpose of profiteering by certain businesses.  Why should we take advantage of the desperation of some families who are living below the poverty line and receiving inadequate social assistance, especially migrant families?  If we continue to promote child labour, then we are no better than those third world countries where unfortunately it exists in large numbers.  There is no excuse to expand the use of child labour either in Canada or the U.S.!

Canada Labor Force Labour Force US

Leave a comment »
Apr 19

What Does the Acronym “DINC” Stand For, And Why Has It Resurfaced Today?

by bcurry

During the early eighties, young people who were economically struggling were putting off marriages, children and buying homes.  They represented what became known as the DINC generation, that is to say “dual income no children”.  More recently, the acronym was expanded to DINCWAG, or “dual income no children with a dog”.  The acronym has again surfaced today.

Today’s younger generation, be they millennials or Generation Z, are facing tough economic times as a result of COVID and the current inflationary situation, where high interest rates and soaring housing prices have excluded many from the market.  In addition, rents in major urban centers are at an all time high and new residential construction was greatly impacted by COVID and problems with supply management.  Even in the high-tech industries, more and more layoffs are occurring.

Since the boomer period following the Second World War, birth rates in North American have been slowly declining.  Few people are having three or more children anymore and, with more women participating in the labour market and having professional careers, women are delaying having children into their thirties and even forties.  However, despite new fertility techniques, women are often restricted to having only one child as they become biologically older.  As well, a growing number of people are deciding not to have children, citing concerns such as climate change and inequality.  One suspects from recent studies that this situation will most likely become the norm in our society.

Even Elon Musk has entered into the debate by proclaiming that ‘civilization is going to crumble’ if people don’t have more children.  Musk further added that too many “good, smart people” think there are too many people in the world and that the population is growing out of control.  What does Musk mean by ‘civilization’?  Within his assertions lies an underlying perspective that what the industrialized countries need are more people born to so-called “smart people”.  This gets a little to too close to Adolf Hitler’s obsession with ‘racial purity’ and use of the word ‘Aryan’ to describe his idea of a ‘pure German race’ whereby the ‘Aryan race’ had a duty to control the world.  There are far right extremist white groups in North America who believe that current immigration levels from so-called ‘third world’ countries are diluting the population.  They are thereby loosing their traditional white privilege status, and feel threatened.  Such groups push for white women to have more children, thereby maintaining political and economic control within the society.  Don’t even talk about interracial marriage with these folks!

Let’s get real!  The so-called DINC phenomenon has more to do with the economic realities of our times.  It’s tough to have children in an age when the costs associated with raising children in our society are much greater than in the past.  Child care is not cheap and often women or men do not have access to adequate and affordable parental leave after the birth of a child.  The higher costs of higher education alone can be a major consideration, given that most parents want their children to graduate with a degree and go on to more lucrative employment.

With the current labour shortages in several sectors, the U.S. and Canada cannot afford to not use immigration as the primary means to fill jobs with skilled labour.  These jobs include everything from agricultural workers, construction workers, truckers to workers in the services sector.  Let’s face it, the DINC phenomenon is real and one sees it in communities on a daily basis.  The phenomenon has been gradually growing and was expedited by the COVID pandemic, which in itself has had an enormous impact on the world of work in North America.  New technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI), are having a major impact and are creating a good degree of uncertainty among the younger generation.  Uncertainty is the key word.  Dealing with it will continue to be a difficult challenge for young couples today and into the near future.  Perhaps Elon Musk might want to come down from his pedestal and recognize the realities of the age in which we live.

Canada Extremist Groups Immigration Immigration Policies Labor Force Labour Force The American Dream Women's Issues

Leave a comment »
Mar 13

Work-Life Balance and Shift to More Stay-at-Home Fathers

by bcurry

One thing that the pandemic has done is to give more fathers, notably those working remotely, a chance to spend more time with their family members, especially their children.  A study by Statistics Canada in 2010 indicated that about 12 percent of stay-at-home parents were the fathers, triple the number recorded in 1986.  I would expect that many of us probably know at least one or more parenting couples where the man has stayed at home for a number of valid and rational reasons.  Often, it is the fact that the woman is in a better paying job with good health and dental benefits, as well as opportunities for advancement.  Due to changes in the labour market, data has shown that women increasingly have become the top earner in the family.  In many cases, there are considerations over the high cost of childcare, particularly where it is not subsidized by the state and where affordable and licensed childcare is lacking.  From a monetary point of view, it just doesn’t make any financial sense for both parents to work.

A survey by Harvard’s Making Caring Common project in June 2020 found that more than two-thirds of fathers said they felt closer to their children since the pandemic started.  As well, according to a Morning Consult survey for The New York Times in 2022, 47 percent of employed fathers said flexibility and control over their hours was a top priority.  This is 10 percentage points more than those who said they felt that way before the pandemic.  Recruiters are also now seeing more and more men with families who are asking about the company’s position on flexible hours and parental leave provisions.

Surprisingly, many employers still require long, inflexible hours and penalize workers for prioritizing family life.  However, what the pandemic and its impact on working conditions did is to expedite what was already a known trend in the labour market.  Working remotely has given more fathers the opportunity to share greater responsibility in household duties and childcare.  Where both parents worked, working women in the past had to do most of the household work. Now, all that has changed with the advent of new technologies and working conditions.  In many occupations in certain industries, telework and hybrid work have increasingly become the norm. 

There is little doubt that efforts to reduce the costs of childcare and ensure the quality of public and private childcare providers will result in influencing the current trends, particularly in Canada.  Recently, provincial governments signed on to a major federal initiative to increase the amount of affordable childcare spaces across the country over the next five to ten years.

Regardless, more and more fathers will be looking to their employers to accommodate having more time to spend with their families.  The issue of work-life balance is at the top of their agenda, forcing employers to adjust accordingly if they wish to retain experienced and motivated employees, both men and women.

Canada Labor Force Labour Force US Women's Issues Women's Issues

Leave a comment »
Mar 3

Employ of Children in High Risk Jobs Still Exists in North America

by bcurry

In my experience in the occupational health and safety (OHS) field at the federal level in Canada over two decades, I came across numerous examples of young people, often 13 to 17 years old, who were killed or injured on the job.  In both Canada and the U.S., labour standards legislation prescribes that young people of certain ages cannot work in employment where risks to health and safety are high — such as mining, construction, agriculture, oil and gas, roofing, meat processing, commercial baking, forestry, etc., etc.  Normally, to work in higher risk jobs, persons must be 18 or older and require more OHS training and supervision than older workers.  This is the law.  However, U.S. federal law still allows those 12 and older to work on farms for unlimited hours, as long as there is no conflict with school.  For general nonfarm work, federal law sets 14 as the minimum age and restricts work for children under 16 to eight hours a day.

Regardless, there continue to be cases where child labour is still seen in certain industries, particularly where the exposure to hazards and safety risks are clearly part of the work.  For example, in 2011 American public health experts and federal labor officials sought to bar teenagers under 16 from the tobacco fields, citing the grueling hours and the harmful exposure to nicotine and other chemicals.  However, their efforts have been continuously blocked.  Opponents of such use of child labour noted that Brazil, India and some other tobacco-producing nations already prohibit anyone under 18 from working on tobacco farms.  American agricultural organizations argued that the proposed federal rule would hurt family farms and make it harder for young people to learn farming skills. The Obama administration withdrew the the proposal in April 2012 after encountering intense opposition from farm groups and Republican lawmakers.  At the time, some big tobacco corporations however said they strongly opposed the illegal use of child labour.  Philip Morris International bans its growers from using workers under 18, a measure that goes well beyond American law. Some labour contractors, however, evidently have flouted this requirement without the growers’ knowledge.

This past week, the New York Times published an article which investigated the number of migrant children ending up in dangerous jobs that violate child labour laws — including in plants that make products for well-known brands like Cheetos and Fruit of the Loom and belong to companies supplying Hearthside Food Solutions, Walmart, Target, PepsiCo, Ben & Jerry’s, Whole Foods, Ford and General Motors.  Many of these children, 13 to 17, are falling through wide cracks in the regulatory system.  The Times noted that the growth of migrant child labour in the U.S. over the past several years is a result of a chain of wilful ignorance.  Companies ignore the young faces in their back rooms and on their factory floors.  Schools often decline to report apparent labour violations, believing it will hurt children more than help.  And the Department of Health and Human Services, responsible for ensuring sponsors will support these children and protect them from trafficking or exploitation, behaves as if the migrant children who melt unseen into the country are doing just fine.  Too many people are turning a blind eye!

Some of these children will actually die on the job.  For example, the Times reported that recent deaths included a 14-year-old food delivery worker who was hit by a car while on his bike at a Brooklyn intersection; a 16-year-old who was crushed under a 35-ton tractor-scraper outside Atlanta; and a 15-year-old who fell 50 feet from a roof in Alabama where he was laying down shingles.  Over the years, I found numerous examples of young people (13 to 17) in Canada being killed while in higher-risk employment.  Many more have been injured on the job, often seriously.

Of equal concern is that the evident use of migrant children by scurrilous businesses has led to increased child trafficking in the U.S.  Traffickers bring in migrant children illegally, give them fake I.D.s and find them businesses willing to turn a blind eye and employ them.  This is all being done despite the knowledge and oversight of several federal, state and local authorities.  Finally, after several media investigative sources raised this issue, the Biden administration just announced a wide crackdown on the labour exploitation of migrant children, including more aggressive investigations of companies benefiting from their work and the larger companies that have child labour in their supply chains.  In addition, Congress needs to increase penalties for child labour violations, which may now be occurring in the thousands.  Federal investigators have long complained that the maximum fine for violations — about $15,000 per occurrence — is hardly enough to deter child labour.  It’s about time that something concrete may be done!

Canada Labor Force Labour Force US

Leave a comment »
Jan 18

How Immigration Must Play More Significant Role When It Comes To Future Labour Force

by bcurry

Recently, reports are coming out of China that since the Communist Party took power, China’s population has started to level off.  Soon, India will surpass China in terms of population and population growth.  Much of the Chinese population decline was of course due to deliberate policies by governments, including the previous one-child policy, aimed at lowering its overall population growth.  However, such policies, while effective, have led to major concerns over future labour shortages due to low birth rates and an aging population.  It is reported that by 2035, 400 million people in China are expected to be over 60, accounting for nearly a third of its population.  Whether or not the government can provide widespread access to elder care, medical services and a stable stream of income later in life will also affect a long-held assumption that the Communist Party can provide a better life for its people.  In the case of China, few believe that its restrictive immigration policies will help out in the short-term.

What do these predictions have to do with the North American scene?  The fact of the matter is that both Canada and the U.S. are also facing issues surrounding aging populations, lower fertility rates and their subsequent impact on the labour market and social safety nets.  Simply put, in order to maintain a population via the annual birth rate, one needs to have at least two children born to each couple.  This is referred to as the replacement rate.  In 2020, Canada’s total fertility rate hit a record low.  In addition, in Canada more than nine million baby boomers are set to retire over the next decade, creating a potential labour shortage that, if unchecked, could raise health-care costs, upend pension payments and halt the country’s economic growth.  The current population of Canada is estimated at less than 40 million.  As the population ages, the median age had climbed steadily from 26.2 in 1971 to 41.1 in 2021, a trend observed in many advanced economies including the U.S.

This is why both Canada and the U.S. will continue to rely on immigrants to augment future labour forces.  Restricting immigration for political reasons, such as occurred under President Trump’s administration, will backfire when it comes to the rate of population growth.  Until recently, natural change — births minus deaths — had always been the primary driver of growth in Canada and the U.S.  However, even before the pandemic hit, these aging nations were already experiencing a decline in fertility and increase in deaths.  This is partly why Canada welcomed over 405,000 newcomers in 2021 – the most ever welcomed in a single year. The Federal Government is continuing its ambitious immigration policy by setting targets in the new levels plan of 465,000 permanent residents in 2023, 485,000 in 2024 and 500,000 in 2025. 

However, there is one exception in Canada when it comes to increasing immigration.  According to recent data, the province of Quebec is taking a dwindling share of immigrants to Canada.  Under an agreement between the federal government and Quebec, Quebec controls the number of economic immigrants it takes each year.  In 2022, Quebec brought in roughly 15.7 percent of permanent immigrants to Canada, despite the province representing nearly 23 percent of Canada’s population.  Quebec’s current immigration policy is primarily based on its desire to have immigrants who are capable of living and working in French, Quebec’s official language.  The province’s Immigration Minister, Christine Fréchette, has stated that Quebec has to limit immigration to French speakers to protect the French language.  The minister further made it clear that the province won’t be boosting levels anytime soon.  However, strong opposition to this policy has surfaced within certain key sectors within Quebec, notably within business sectors which already are dealing with labour shortages.  For example, the Quebec Manufacturers and Exporters association said the province desperately needs these newcomers because there are labour shortages everywhere.  The association estimates that some $7 billion (Canadian) in manufacturing output that could have taken place last year was sidelined due to current labour shortages.

As in the case of China, the Quebec provincial government has implemented several schemes to encourage Quebecers to have more children, however with little notable success.  In both cases, government handouts like cash for babies and tax cuts, have failed to change the underlying fact that many young people simply do not want children.  Fertility rates continue to fall as incomes rise and education levels increase, and more women are participating in the labour force.  Other factors have contributed to the reluctance to have more children; including the burden that many younger adults face in taking care of aging parents and grandparents, the high costs of raising and educating children, and the increase in the number of working couples in order to make ends meet.  For these reasons, countries have fewer options other than increasing immigration to offset their aging populations and maintain their standards of living.

Canada Immigration Immigration Policies Labor Force Labour Force US

Leave a comment »
Jan 6

Flexible Working Aimed At Improving Work-Life Balance Is Making A Comeback

by bcurry

For the last two decades I have been following workplace trends toward flexible working arrangements offered by employers and the resulting pros and cons.  Now, the issue has once again raised its head as a result of discussions around post-pandemic alternative working conditions, including remote work or various hybrid arrangements.  The Great Recession of 2008 caused a lot of employers to consider alternate and more flexible working arrangements for their employees so as to better retain the most critical members of their workforce.  Struggling to survive the economic downturn, the need for increased productivity became greater than ever, which made it the perfect time for companies to introduce smarter working practices.  In a 2009 survey of 400 employers by the Families and Work Institute in New York found that 81 percent had maintained flexible work arrangements such as telecommuting, compressed workweeks, phased retirement and voluntary reduced hours.  Among companies with 1,000 or more workers, 37 percent used flexible work arrangements to minimize layoffs. 

As one can see, the idea of flexible working arrangements is not a new concept.  If anything, interest in promoting work-life balance has increased as a result of the pandemic’s impact on work and the labour force.  A recent report by the International Labour Organization (ILO) concludes that giving workers flexibility in terms of where and when they work can be win-win for both employees and businesses.  The ILO report further concludes that flexible work schedules can improve workers’ job satisfaction, performance and commitment to an organization — thereby reducing recruitment costs and increasing productivity.

“Flexibility” is now the new magic word for recruiters, and for good rationale as flexibility (or lack thereof) is consistently one of the biggest reasons employees cite for staying or leaving a job.  While pay continues to be paramount for most people, in the current environment companies need to find new ways to distinguish themselves as an employer of choice.  Unfortunately, there are still some employers who fail to see the benefits of offering flexible work arrangements in an era when new technologies better facilitate such opportunities, including remote or hybrid forms of work.  For example, the Canadian federal government recently mandated a policy requiring workers this coming spring to work at least two to three days a week in person, or between 40 to 60 percent of their regular schedule.  This employer is saying that in-person work better supports collaboration, team spirit, innovation and a culture of belonging.  While the federal Treasury Board is arguing that the employer has the right to determine where employees work, several federal unions are going to the courts to argue against the policy.  This has angered thousands of employees who currently have flexible working arrangements, especially as they are currently in contract negotiations.  However, I believe that the primary drive behind this employer’s decision has more to do with management’s continuing distrust in not having in-person accountability and supervision, believing other arrangements negatively affect productivity.

However, most experts agree that, in what continues to be a tough economic climate, empowering employees with the right tools and working environment will have numerous flow-on benefits; including improved customer service, retaining talent, ultimately giving the business a significant competitive advantage.  Most experts would agree that giving workers flexibility in terms of where and when they work can be win-win for both employees and businesses.  The above noted ILO report echoes the findings of many other recent studies and surveys.  While salary, benefits and work security have historically topped the list of sought-after incentives, multiple post-pandemic polls have found workers, especially women, increasingly prioritizing work-life balance.  The main question now is whether or not employers can really afford to not seriously consider promoting work-life balance through greater flexible working conditions?

Canada Labor Force Labour Force US

Leave a comment »
Nov 14

Recent Layoffs Among White-Collar Workers and CEOs Can’t Stop Saying Sorry

by bcurry

Last August a survey was released by consultant PwC which polled more than 700 U.S. executives and board members across a range of industries.  It found that half of respondents said they’re reducing headcount or plan to, and 52 percent had implemented hiring freezes.  The projected layoffs were seen to especially hit the high tech and financial sectors, primarily among middle- and lower-management.  Since rising interest rates in March resulted in home sales slowing to a crawl, there have also been widespread cuts for realtors, mortgage brokers and appraisers.  Unlike blue-collar workers where there is a current shortage of labour, most analysts would agree that this particular round of layoffs will have its greatest impact among white-collar workers.

As of today, forecasted layoffs in significant numbers are happening across the U.S. and Canada.  Many are occurring among some of our largest employers, including for example: Meta Platform Inc., Netflix Inc., Shopify, Wayfair Inc., Oracle Corp, and Apple Inc.  Walmart Inc., Ford Motor Co., Gap Inc., Zillow Group Inc. and Stanley Black & Decker Inc. also announced they plan to cut jobs at their head offices.  Of course, Elon Musk, following his purchase of the company, leads the way with his recent announcement that half of Twitter’s workforce is being dismissed.  These are all companies that did well during the pandemic, notably because of the growth in on-line sales and business.  However, now that the pandemic is coming to an end and interest rates are rising and stock price valuations are in decline, the boom appears to be over.  Thousands upon thousands are being laid off, largely because of massive hiring during the pandemic itself and management’s misreading of the markets.

The layoffs couldn’t have come at a worst time for white-collar workers given that the labour market today is extremely tight, with about 1.9 available jobs for every unemployed person.  What is interesting, many CEOs are openly expressing regret by stating that the situation is largely their fault.  They obviously recognize that they’ll probably need to hire back some of the talented and skilled people they laid off, and could be positioning themselves to recruit again when the recovery comes.  This is being done out of self-interest and to maintain a good product name.  At the same time, about two-thirds of firms surveyed are boosting pay or expanding mental-health benefits, largely to retain the remaining workers.  The most common move is making remote work permanent for more people.  For this reason, many CEOs are trying to appear to initiate the layoffs in as humane way as possible.

Otherwise, just saying you’re sorry is not enough!  There will obviously be a need to keep doors open once the economy recovers.  One question will be the nature of employment and the workplace down the road.  While replacing blue-collar workers with robotics for example is increasingly a concern, the advent of the greater use of artificial intelligence will be an issue for white-collar workers.  For example, Deutsche Bank’s CEO John Cryan hinted in 2017 that half its workers could be replaced by machines.  According to a survey in the same year by Greenwich Associates, around 75% of financial firms were intending to either explore or implement artificial intelligence technologies.  Among Canada’s five big banks, there are artificial intelligence-powered chatbots that now interact with customers through a bank’s digital channels — online, mobile and social media, and programmable software bots perform administrative tasks such as processing mortgage applications.  These virtual machines are already being tasked with some heavy lifting.

Otherwise, no one’s job is guaranteed to be safe now or in the future, including many of today’s white-collar jobs.  There is little doubt that, as more permanent cost cutting measures occur, companies will be looking to enhance their productivity and lower labour costs through the use of new technologies.  There is no profession or field of employment that is safe anymore.  The fact that CEOs are currently letting go so many white-collar workers, may also offer them an opportune time to look at new replacement strategies.  I wonder if CEOS like Elon Musk will continue to say ‘sorry’?

Labor Force Labour Force Reopening the Economy

Leave a comment »
«Older Entries
Blog at WordPress.com.