3 ms·
It's hard to predict. Consider bank tellers. ATMs initially allowed banks to run more local branches, resulting in more jobs. But now that ATMs, especially the
by tyingq 4y ago
It's hard to predict. Consider bank tellers. ATMs initially allowed banks to run more local branches, resulting in more jobs. But now that ATMs, especially the ones inside, are VERY full function, the job numbers are reducing fast.
https://www.vox.com/2017/5/8/15584268/eric-schmidt-alphabet-automation-atm-bank-teller https://www.vox.com/2017/5/8/15584268/eric-schmidt-alphabet-...
- 13of40 4y agoEven that one's a little bit meta, since fewer people are using cash now.
- chrisan 4y agoI don't think its because ATMs are so good/functional as much as it is people just don't use cash and deposite checks like they once did. > “because of industry consolidation and technological change,”
- lisasays 4y agoThe job numbers are reducing fast. Are they? That piece is from 2017, yet we still see bank tellers everywhere. It seems the increased efficiency of ATMs caused some reduction in the count of teller jobs - but their number has again stabilized. ATMs meanwhile seem pretty much maxed out with their current feature set.
- tyingq 4y agohttps://www.bls.gov/ooh/office-and-administrative-support/tellers.htm#tab-6 https://www.bls.gov/ooh/office-and-administrative-support/te... Already reduced numbers, and a prediction of a 12% drop over the next 10 years, versus an average 5% gain for other jobs. As mentioned in other replies, not just ATMs, but cashless self-service of all types.
- lisasays 4y agoI stand corrected (thank you, btw) as to the continued reduction - but a 1.2 percent annual rate does sound a bit on the slow side.
- chii 4y agobut it's true that many banks are closing branches in less visited areas, and justifying it (to their local community) with an ATM.