8 Amendments of Marian HARKIN related to 2015/2103(INL)
Amendment 10 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 a (new)
Paragraph 1 a (new)
1a. points out that while automation has in general positive effects, nevertheless, over the next decade some jobs will be completely eliminated and many others affected. Highlights that for the time being, considering the currently available technologies, activities which involve human interaction like caring, guiding and leading people or which require expertise for decision making, planning or creative work are the hardest ones to automate;
Amendment 19 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 1 b (new)
Paragraph 1 b (new)
1 b. stresses that robotisation requires an interplay among several factors such as: technical feasibility, the cost of developing and deploying both the hardware and the software for automation, the cost of labour and related supply-and-demand and the benefits apart from labour substitution i.e. the quality of output. Therefore, understanding the activities that are most susceptible to automation from a technical perspective could provide an unique opportunity to rethink how workers engage with their jobs and how digital labour platforms can better connect individuals, teams and projects;
Amendment 38 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 2 a (new)
Paragraph 2 a (new)
2 a. calls for efforts to create the kind of educational system that will preserve the value of human labour in the future to prevent situations where groups which might be considered "obsolete" could be deemed "inferior". Highlights also the importance of peopling adapting their skills to the tasks in which they continue to have a comparative advantage over machines;
Amendment 50 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 3 a (new)
Paragraph 3 a (new)
3a. points out however, that there are risks from using robots which should be carefully weighed against the benefits they might bring. Work injuries caused by robots and related claims should be kept in mind. While wearable robot technology like exoskeletons aimed at protecting against workplace injuries might increase productivity, they could give rise to higher employer expectations of human workers and, in turn, to greater injury risks. This must be taken into consideration by legislators, employers, unions and employees via internal rules, collective agreements etc. Other risks associated with robots might relate to anti-discrimination which could occur following a job interview in the event of data that was acquired leading to unintended analysis. Trade and privacy issues could also appear following the use of robots;
Amendment 61 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4
Paragraph 4
4. points out that, whilst robotics and artificial intelligence promise real advantages in the short and medium term in terms of effectiveness and economy not only for production and trade but also in areas where human intelligence hitherto meant there were only humans (whose work will be increasingly unnecessary), there is a danger of the number of jobs in the field of robotics not increasing to match the number of jobs which are expected to be lost; believes in this regard that employee ownership and financial participation schemes for employees to co- own and invest in robots could play a role in ensuring employees have a financial interest in robots which may compete with them on the labour market in the future thus ensuring a second stream of income independent from their job;
Amendment 67 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 4 a (new)
Paragraph 4 a (new)
4 a. stresses that the majority of benefits coming from automatisation and robotisation in employment should come not only from reducing labour costs but from raising productivity through fewer errors, higher output and improved quality, safety and speed;
Amendment 97 #
Draft opinion
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Paragraph 5 a (new)
Amendment 99 #
5 b. points to scientific studies which have identified four major problems that arise when trying to legislate for the use of robots: - discretion, with regard to the platforms and manufacturers involved in the development and research of artificial intelligence, which might not always be visible to regulators; - diffuseness which arises when artificial intelligence systems are developed using teams of researchers that are organisationally, geographically and jurisdictionally separate; - discretion refers to the fact that artificial intelligence systems could entail many separate, distinct pre-existing hardware and software components. The effects of bringing all those components together may not be fully appreciated until after the fact. - opacity means that the way in which artificial intelligence systems work may be more opaque than previous technologies. This might constitute a problem for regulators as there is a lack of clarity concerning the problems that may be posed by such systems and how those problems can be addressed.