It’s perhaps fair to say that governments around the world haven’t really gotten on top of the future of work over the past few years, with a lack of real understanding coupled with an incredibly slow pace of change that inevitably means that they are operating several steps behind the market.

Does a recent report from the UK government’s Work and Pensions Committee offer any cause for greater optimism?  Not really.  While the report rightly states that changes in the workplace are having an uneven impact on different groups of workers, the prospect of the government being proactive enough to provide meaningful support seems minimal.

Lack of long-term plan

The report highlights the lack of any real long-term plan by the government to enable it to prepare for the future of work in the Fourth Industrial Revolution.  The authors share my belief that while technology is very unlikely to lead to mass unemployment, it will nonetheless disrupt jobs in various ways, with the impact likely to be disproportionately felt by certain vulnerable groups.

What’s more, these changes run the very real risk of exacerbating existing inequalities as ethnic minorities, the young, women, and the disabled are especially vulnerable.  As such, a renewed focus on training and reskilling should be fundamental to the government support offered via its Kickstart and Restart employment support schemes.

“Deep-seated trends were already driving labour market inequalities. The pandemic has hit fast forward on them. As we emerge, automation and new technologies will continue to transform both how people work and the skills they need to succeed,” Stephen Timms MP, Chair of the Work and Pensions Committee, says. “The Government needs to plan now, to avoid large groups – younger workers, women, disabled people and those from some ethnic backgrounds – being left behind.”

The authors also urge the government to push forward the Employment Bill that aims to provide better protection for the growing number of people in precarious work, such as those in gig employment.

Meaningful action

All of which is reasonable and fairly uncontroversial.  What matters most, however, is turning these thoughts into action, and it’s here that the report stumbles.  The authors correctly highlight that the Department of Work and Pensions lacks sufficient planning for the long-term changes we’re seeing in the world of work, but it doesn’t really do much to plug that gap.

For instance, the report reiterates the recommendation made by the committee in June last year to bring forward the government’s Employment Bill to ensure that gig workers and others in precarious work receive better protection.

To counter the uneven impact of technology and changes in the labor market, the authors urge the government to setup a new advisory body to help them to better understand the changes happening in the future of work.  While greater understanding is, of course, important, it seems unlikely that yet another body or committee is going to precipitate swift and decisive action.

Similarly, the report’s recommendation that greater support for digital skills training is lacklustre, not least as it omits the kind of wraparound support that is so often vital to ensure that disadvantaged and vulnerable groups are able to capitalize on any training support that is available.

It all just seems rather underwhelming, and unlikely to lead to the kind of meaningful changes that are so urgently required if we are to “build back better” after the pandemic.