DIALOGUE

The Economist : Hello, today I wanted to ask your opinion about robotization which could
create layoffs and therefore unemployment.
The company director: For me, as a company director, I think that investing in high-tech tools
would be beneficial for the company.
The trade unionist: I don't agree at all. It may be good for you as a business owner but not for
the employees who have to live and this redundancy can be disastrous for families who
depend on a single salary.
The Employee : I share your point of view, the machine can be interesting for boring and
repetitive tasks like assembly line work but they should not eliminate jobs. Now we are afraid
of being replaced by robots.
The Economist : I think you are all partly right, robotization allows to replace a labour force
that is sometimes expensive, but it should not be abused, the fears of the employees are
justified because, soon, machines will have the same intelligence as humans, but I think they
cannot have the same emotions.
The Trade unionist: If we fire employees, we have to put a retraining plan in place for them,
so that they are not unemployed.
The company manager : You're quite right, but I'll tell you why I want to invest in machines :
they allow us to reduce costs because we don't have to pay for them, so they're faster and
more efficient, especially for me as a factory manager, it saves me time. It allows me to
produce more, it is much more profitable for me.
The Employee: I understand your point of view, but replacing people with machines may not
be the solution, they can help people with complicated tasks, but not replace them
completely. Also, machines are not totally reliable, they may be better at manufacturing than
we are, but they can break down and be repaired, they can also make mistakes, and they are
brand new now but in the long run they may lose you money.
The Trade unionist : I totally agree with you! Machines can break down frequently and can
also be hacked and use your data, they need to be maintained regularly, etc.
The company manager : I don't think you're right, I'd rather maintain machines than have to
put up with employees going on strike. Machines are easy to use, it's a big step forward in
progress. These innovative digital devices reduce work and save time even though they may
have flaws.
The Economist : I think machines can be beneficial for companies like yours which is a
factory. But for more skilled and difficult jobs with a higher level of education they cannot
replace humans or even in jobs that require a relationship between human beings such as
psychologists or bakers.
The company manager : Yes, I think you are right, but by replacing workers with machines, I
will assign employees to other, more precise tasks.
The employee : I think it's a good compromise, you don't want to threaten the workers' jobs.
But combining machines and employees is a good idea, I think. The more detailed work could
be given to employees and the assembly line work to machines.
The economist : Yes, to conclude, machines will never be able to totally replace humans, we
will always need human intelligence to live. But they can help them.