COMMENTARY
Advances in Technology Increase the Homeless Population
by Tricia Pannier
People are touting how much technology has advanced, how it helps us, saves us time, and keeps us connected in ways we only dreamed possible on Star Trek or The Jetsons. Because of the increased benefits most of us experience due to technology, it is easy to overlook the harm some of these advances cause a growing segment of our society. Technological advancement has increased the number of people that are homeless, or who are on the verge of becoming homeless. That is not to say technology is evil, but it�s important to recognize and address the fact that some of us are being left behind.
Automation has replaced human workers in many factories and offices. Companies, particularly those involved in manufacturing, have learned they can save money by replacing workers with automated robots and computers. Unlike their human counterparts, the machines are not unionized, and they do not need benefits or even breaks. They do not require workers compensation insurance or unemployment insurance; if they break down, the companies just repair or replace them. Best of all for the companies, the robots will work continuously without overtime pay! It�s easy to see that these automated robots, even if expensive initially, will quickly pay for themselves in savings on costly benefits packages and payroll.
Once these workers are turned out into the streets, their job choices are limited, mainly because their job skills are limited. Often the only jobs displaced factory workers are qualified for are �low-tech, low-paying service jobs as cashiers or custodians, if they can find jobs at all� (Beekman 253). These service jobs rarely pay more than minimum wage. Even though the federal minimum wage has increased in recent years, the true value of minimum wage has decreased due to a number of factors, including inflation, the shrinking number of unionized workers, a decline in the number of manufacturing jobs, and the related growth of service jobs. For example, the value of minimum wage in 1997 was 18.1% less than it was in 1979 (�Why Homeless?�).
Housing is not something people can afford on minimum wage. The federal government defines �affordable housing� as housing that costs no more than 30% of a worker�s income. According to statistics compiled by U.S. Housing and Urban Development, in the median state a minimum wage worker would have to work 87 hours each week to afford a two-bedroom apartment (�Why Homeless?�).
Apparently people who work in manufacturing jobs are dispensable, and we tend to think of service laborers as dispensable too; but how does a hotel run without maid service, and how does a restaurant operate without servers and cooks, or how do we go to work without daycare for our children? It is important to note that 20% of the homeless adult population work, though many of them work in day labor or service jobs that don�t pay enough to meet basic needs, and acceleration in technology excludes other homeless adults from a competitive job market (�Homelessness in America�). We need quality service laborers, which means we need to pay them a better wage -- a living wage.
What obligation is owed to these workers displaced by technology, if any, and who owes it to them? Certainly their former employers owe them some kind of assistance. With all the money the company will save down the road, they can certainly afford to spring for some job skills training and job placement assistance for the group of people they have just turned out into the street.
As a society (particularly as an American society that values the opportunity to work hard and move up in the world from no matter where you start), we owe these workers the chance to work and make enough money to provide themselves and their families adequate food and shelter. A grass-roots movement to force companies to pay employees a living wage, as opposed to minimum wage, is gaining momentum around the country. Currently twelve states have passed laws that push minimum wage requirements higher than the federal level of $5.15 per hour (Armour).
We can also encourage education by making it affordable and accessible. According to recently released U.S. census figures, there is a direct correlation between the amount of education a person has to the amount of money that person will earn in a lifetime (Baird and Stewart). Additionally, some studies suggest that though the demand for factory workers, clerical workers, semi-skilled and unskilled laborers will drop dramatically in the next decade or so, the demand for professionals, specifically teachers and engineers, will sharply increase (Beekman 253).
Not everyone is cut out for an Ivy League education, nor does everyone need one. Community colleges are a great, and relatively inexpensive, introduction to the world of undergraduate education -- we need more of them. Technical or vocational skills training are other alternatives that are preferable to some people. After all, someone needs to repair those automated robots when they break down.
___________________________
References
Beekman, George. (2001). Computer Confluence. New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
National Coalition for the Homeless (June 1999). Why Are People Homeless? Retrieved June 27, 2002, from http://www.nationalhomeless.org/facts.html
National Law Center on Homelessness & Poverty (2002). Homelessness and Poverty in America. Retrieved June 27, 2002, from http://www.nlchp.org/FA_HAPIA/
Armour, Stephanie. (2002, July 23). Living-wage movement takes root across nation. USA Today, p. 1A.
Baird, Joe and Kirsten Stewart. (2002, July 18). Education Pays, Census Says. The Salt Lake Tribune, p. A1.
