In 1811 and 1812, at the Finland Phone Number List of the 1 st industrial revolution in England, the revenge Luddits were already breaking the looms they accused of destroying their jobs. They were also right since a few years later, the main professions represented in the Luddism movement had disappeared. A century later (1913), 2 nd industrial revolution: Renault suffered a historic general strike initiated by its workers who categorically refused the introduction of the methods of Taylorism (notably timekeeping) in the workshops. Another century later, the debate between Technology and Man is relaunched with 4.0. In short, the fears of workers

yesterday and today remain the same:the deterioration of working conditions, the reduction in wages (or even the loss of employment), the devaluation of the artisanal tradition . Are we right to fear the factory of the future? The deterioration of working conditions In the factory of the future, the place of Man and his condition of worker are rethought. In Lean, there is a Muda, a mess, which is rarely cited. Its addition to the list of 7 traditional mudas is not, moreover, systematic. This is the underuse of the skills of the employee . If a worker devotes 80% of his time to a repetitive (manual or intellectual) activity – therefore a priori painful –

The Deterioration Of Working Conditions

then it does not seem absurd to automate this activity, by AI, an automaton or other, so as to decrease the proportion of this task in his daily work. Likewise, the ” user experience”(safety, ergonomics) of workers is a priority in 4.0 factories. This explains the argument for the “ingratitude” of tasks which are therefore automated. The fact is that still many dangerous tasks (sources of MSDs, musculoskeletal disorders, for example) are still performed by workers and it seems difficult to blame the decisions taken in the direction of their elimination, of their automation. . Where the devil is man’s place in our factories? Job loss Training or

Finland-Phone-List

data literacyis at the heart of the social issue of 4.0. The challenge is to ensure the development of people’s skills: learning to manage several machines or robots simultaneously, to work with a cobot, to use new tools such as augmented reality, to interact with artificial intelligence, etc. the effect, depending on the case, of freeing up time or of directly increasing the output per employee. Freeing up time is supposed to allow workers to reallocate their time on value-added activities such as problem solving, participation in improvement projects, innovation (which often has the indirect effect of increasing yield). Yet this is precisely

The Death Of Craftsmanship

what is scary: at iso-production, “Increased output” or “improved times” often means job cuts. To keep our jobs, we must therefore answer this question: do we want to grow or simply reduce iso-production costs? Our civilization has already answered this question… But the challenge remains sizeable. And yet, as we have seen, hiring on new industrial sites is indeed decreasing … But this observation should be put into perspective because on the one hand it applies to industrial sites at the start of their life (and therefore subject to potential growth) and other parts industrial employment is increasing overall here (+3,000 jobs in

France in 2017 compared to the previous year). do we want to grow or simply reduce costs at iso-production? Our civilization has already answered this question… But the challenge remains sizeable. And yet, as we have seen, hiring on new industrial sites is indeed decreasing … But this observation should be put into perspective because on the one hand it applies to industrial sites at the start of their life (and therefore subject to potential growth) and other parts industrial employment is increasing overall here (+3,000 jobs in France in 2017 compared to the previous year). do we want to grow or simply reduce costs

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.