10 ms·

Every facet of the article is designed to wring sympathy, but it's worth asking the real question: what is this advocating for? What kind of change (or stasis)

Every facet of the article is designed to wring sympathy, but it's worth asking the real question: what is this advocating for? What kind of change (or stasis) would the author actually prefer to see? The existence of call-center work, which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious, is considered a failure of our society. The replacement or automation of that work, which creates displacement and impacts the livelihood of people who cannot adequately retrain, is considered a failure of our society. What, exactly, would constitute success?

ramraj07 3y ago
This is like complaining that a National Geographic documentary is too sympathetic towards Gazelles. Sometimes the documentary tries to show the plight of the cheetah too. You can totally elicit sympathy from someone while just showing the natural order of things and expecting no actionable change to come out of it. Moderated capitalism is a beautiful thing. It doesn’t last without good minded people keeping it in check but when it exists, it seems to work the best to improve the human condition. Call center jobs may look like shit to some but to the ones that got out of poverty through them they were heaven send. Now their era is coming to a close and we just have to see what the next natural order of things unfolds to be.
gumballindie 3y ago
> which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious These jobs are dehumanising because of how some companies treat people. AI wont change that some enjoy dehumanising others. A change in attitude, forced by law or social change, would fix that. Now that would be a success.
- 23B1 3y ago
  > A change in attitude, forced by law or social change, would fix that Presented this way it seems like AI would be the more frictionless option!
- pessimizer 3y ago
  These jobs are not dehumanizing because of management. They are simply dehumanizing. If they were paid more, they would just be worth the dehumanization; getting hazard pay doesn't make a job less hazardous. > A change in attitude, forced by law or social change Exactly what would you like to force people to do? What's this "attitude," and by what process does it dehumanize people who work in call centers? Do call center workers have material problems, or is this a question of abstract mindset or aesthetics?
  - tobr 3y ago
    > These jobs are not dehumanizing because of management. They are simply dehumanizing. There’s obviously lots of different types of call center jobs, but I wouldn’t say they are all categorically dehumanizing. I worked as a support agent for a while in my early twenties, and the core of the work was not dehumanizing. But being poorly payed, clocked to the second and not being given adequate equipment or training to do the work well was. I can imagine a version of that job that I would have stuck with for longer.
  - fatfingerd 3y ago
    I find that rather strange, IMO a first level support manager has a very dehumanizing job and gets paid less than top tech support staff. The lifers I've known also didn't want developer jobs as project pressures can feel persistent while a support engineer couldn't care less about your problems when they go home.
  - lmm 3y ago
    > These jobs are not dehumanizing because of management. They are simply dehumanizing. Nonsense. Helping people with their problems isn't dehumanising. Following a script that your company has optimized to avoid helping the person is dehumanising. > Exactly what would you like to force people to do? What's this "attitude," and by what process does it dehumanize people who work in call centers? Do call center workers have material problems, or is this a question of abstract mindset or aesthetics? You could make them fiduciaries for the people calling in, or something slightly less extreme. Call center workers have problems that are superficially material, but addressing them on a directly material level would just be playing whack-a-mole; the unpleasantness of the position stems directly from the incentives that those who control them are under.
- godelski 3y ago
  > A change in attitude, forced by law or social change, would fix that. I'm not quite sure I follow. Aren't we talking about displacing these workers? How does that result in re-humanization? Can we assume they can easily obtain a job of better quality?
xg15 3y ago
What would you tell the people who are out of their job thanks to AI and now can't pay their bills?
- xp84 3y ago
  Probably the same thing you tell people who used to work in buggy whip factories. I know it’s trite but, really, there’s no constant but change.
bradshaw1965 3y ago
<<The existence of call-center work, which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious, is considered a failure of our society The people in the article find it one of the best jobs available and a path to a middle class lifestyle for their area.
- godelski 3y ago
  I've worked at a call center, it fucking sucks. Similar to retail you are the one who has to deal with the anger and frustration of customers due to poor company policies. What makes it worse is that you're a faceless entity on the other side of a magical voice box rather than face to face, in public, where people are more likely to watch their actions and how public responds to that. I'd definitely agree that it can be very dehumanizing. But there are plenty of people who enjoy the job too. Generally I've seen for those people that it is about the money and that they get to sit in an office with air conditioning. Both things can be true. Call it Stockholm Syndrome to the economy or whatever, but things can be dehumanizing while people simultaneously feel lucky to have said work. It could be worse, after all. The bigger question is if we are working on parallel paths to give these displaced workers equal or better opportunities to support themselves. Be that new jobs, avenues for them to educate themselves, basic income, or whatever combination of things raises the economic floor. I do also fear that people will call these people dumb for choosing a career that could "so obviously be automated" but prior to a year ago their biggest fear would be outsourcing to India or Brazil. I wouldn't expect this type of person to even believe it was a realistic possibility until the last 6 months, once this stuff started to hit mainstream. I'll make a prediction that we'll see them in vogue within the next year or two. I also wouldn't be surprised if we see similar sentiment in the comments.
  - darkclouds 3y ago
    I would not be surprised if insurance companies who get claimants to call in, deliberately put people through these voice activated systems simply to listen in and see if their story is straight. Putting them on hold when going through the details is another way for the insurance company to listen in and see if their story is straight. People are lulled into that sense of safety that they cant be heard when on hold. I've listened into conversations whilst someone is ringing my number, its quite interesting the conversations that go on at a company before the customer answers the phone! Youtube reminds me the voice recognition and thus subtitles is not that good!
epolanski 3y ago
> The existence of call-center work, which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious Is that really the end of the world? When I have several issues (banking, electrical/phone/gas company) I want to speak with a human.
xjaeekakappy11 3y ago
[dead]
rg111 3y ago
> The existence of call-center work, which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious The only sure way to not have "dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious" jobs is to not have jobs at all.
xp84 3y ago
I think this is a good question too. Personally I want to see AI take over handling 100% of the calls from confused people who could have just used the website to accomplish their task but are too clueless. Then keep enough humans to exclusively deal with all the actually worthwhile calls, like mine. (I never call unless it can’t be done online.) If people actually want a jobs program (uneconomic work created strictly for the sake of providing income), call it what it is, and at least have people fill potholes, or something else humans are actually better at than machines.
ITB 3y ago
Exactly, this topic requires purposeful journalism. Otherwise it’s just doomerism.
hackinthebochs 3y ago
>The existence of call-center work, which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious, is considered a failure of our society. If the existence of these jobs is a failure of our society, what do you call taking these jobs away without any sufficient replacements that pay as well? There are plenty of places in the US where a call center job is the best job you can get without special skills.
- Legend2440 3y ago
  We will not run out of jobs because there isn't a fixed number of jobs. There's a fixed number of workers. We've been automating jobs for centuries and yet workforce participation has stayed in the 60-70% range. New jobs will always spring into existence to occupy the newly available workers.
  - hackinthebochs 3y ago
    There's an approximately fixed number of jobs in time periods meaningful to humans. My rent is not going to wait for new fields to blossom in the wake of "progress".
    - lmm 3y ago
      > There's an approximately fixed number of jobs in time periods meaningful to humans. Bullshit. I've got relatives who can remember when call centers weren't a thing.
    - the_only_law 3y ago
      > My rent is not going to wait for new fields to blossom in the wake of "progress". Don’t worry, you wouldn’t even be qualified for the new jobs anyway, unless ofc they’re low skilled in which case you might barely scrape by on rent.
    - Legend2440 3y ago
      If we didn't do "progress" we'd both still be farming in the dirt and washing our clothes by hand. It's kind of hypocritical to ask for it to stop as soon as it starts inconveniencing you.

ramraj07 3y ago

This is like complaining that a National Geographic documentary is too sympathetic towards Gazelles. Sometimes the documentary tries to show the plight of the cheetah too. You can totally elicit sympathy from someone while just showing the natural order of things and expecting no actionable change to come out of it. Moderated capitalism is a beautiful thing. It doesn’t last without good minded people keeping it in check but when it exists, it seems to work the best to improve the human condition. Call center jobs may look like shit to some but to the ones that got out of poverty through them they were heaven send. Now their era is coming to a close and we just have to see what the next natural order of things unfolds to be.

gumballindie 3y ago

> which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious These jobs are dehumanising because of how some companies treat people. AI wont change that some enjoy dehumanising others. A change in attitude, forced by law or social change, would fix that. Now that would be a success.

23B1 3y ago
> A change in attitude, forced by law or social change, would fix that Presented this way it seems like AI would be the more frictionless option!
pessimizer 3y ago
These jobs are not dehumanizing because of management. They are simply dehumanizing. If they were paid more, they would just be worth the dehumanization; getting hazard pay doesn't make a job less hazardous. > A change in attitude, forced by law or social change Exactly what would you like to force people to do? What's this "attitude," and by what process does it dehumanize people who work in call centers? Do call center workers have material problems, or is this a question of abstract mindset or aesthetics?
- tobr 3y ago
  > These jobs are not dehumanizing because of management. They are simply dehumanizing. There’s obviously lots of different types of call center jobs, but I wouldn’t say they are all categorically dehumanizing. I worked as a support agent for a while in my early twenties, and the core of the work was not dehumanizing. But being poorly payed, clocked to the second and not being given adequate equipment or training to do the work well was. I can imagine a version of that job that I would have stuck with for longer.
- fatfingerd 3y ago
  I find that rather strange, IMO a first level support manager has a very dehumanizing job and gets paid less than top tech support staff. The lifers I've known also didn't want developer jobs as project pressures can feel persistent while a support engineer couldn't care less about your problems when they go home.
- lmm 3y ago
  > These jobs are not dehumanizing because of management. They are simply dehumanizing. Nonsense. Helping people with their problems isn't dehumanising. Following a script that your company has optimized to avoid helping the person is dehumanising. > Exactly what would you like to force people to do? What's this "attitude," and by what process does it dehumanize people who work in call centers? Do call center workers have material problems, or is this a question of abstract mindset or aesthetics? You could make them fiduciaries for the people calling in, or something slightly less extreme. Call center workers have problems that are superficially material, but addressing them on a directly material level would just be playing whack-a-mole; the unpleasantness of the position stems directly from the incentives that those who control them are under.
godelski 3y ago
> A change in attitude, forced by law or social change, would fix that. I'm not quite sure I follow. Aren't we talking about displacing these workers? How does that result in re-humanization? Can we assume they can easily obtain a job of better quality?

xg15 3y ago

What would you tell the people who are out of their job thanks to AI and now can't pay their bills?

xp84 3y ago
Probably the same thing you tell people who used to work in buggy whip factories. I know it’s trite but, really, there’s no constant but change.

bradshaw1965 3y ago

<<The existence of call-center work, which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious, is considered a failure of our society The people in the article find it one of the best jobs available and a path to a middle class lifestyle for their area.

godelski 3y ago
I've worked at a call center, it fucking sucks. Similar to retail you are the one who has to deal with the anger and frustration of customers due to poor company policies. What makes it worse is that you're a faceless entity on the other side of a magical voice box rather than face to face, in public, where people are more likely to watch their actions and how public responds to that. I'd definitely agree that it can be very dehumanizing. But there are plenty of people who enjoy the job too. Generally I've seen for those people that it is about the money and that they get to sit in an office with air conditioning. Both things can be true. Call it Stockholm Syndrome to the economy or whatever, but things can be dehumanizing while people simultaneously feel lucky to have said work. It could be worse, after all. The bigger question is if we are working on parallel paths to give these displaced workers equal or better opportunities to support themselves. Be that new jobs, avenues for them to educate themselves, basic income, or whatever combination of things raises the economic floor. I do also fear that people will call these people dumb for choosing a career that could "so obviously be automated" but prior to a year ago their biggest fear would be outsourcing to India or Brazil. I wouldn't expect this type of person to even believe it was a realistic possibility until the last 6 months, once this stuff started to hit mainstream. I'll make a prediction that we'll see them in vogue within the next year or two. I also wouldn't be surprised if we see similar sentiment in the comments.
- darkclouds 3y ago
  I would not be surprised if insurance companies who get claimants to call in, deliberately put people through these voice activated systems simply to listen in and see if their story is straight. Putting them on hold when going through the details is another way for the insurance company to listen in and see if their story is straight. People are lulled into that sense of safety that they cant be heard when on hold. I've listened into conversations whilst someone is ringing my number, its quite interesting the conversations that go on at a company before the customer answers the phone! Youtube reminds me the voice recognition and thus subtitles is not that good!

epolanski 3y ago

> The existence of call-center work, which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious Is that really the end of the world? When I have several issues (banking, electrical/phone/gas company) I want to speak with a human.

xjaeekakappy11 3y ago

[dead]

rg111 3y ago

> The existence of call-center work, which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious The only sure way to not have "dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious" jobs is to not have jobs at all.

xp84 3y ago

I think this is a good question too. Personally I want to see AI take over handling 100% of the calls from confused people who could have just used the website to accomplish their task but are too clueless. Then keep enough humans to exclusively deal with all the actually worthwhile calls, like mine. (I never call unless it can’t be done online.) If people actually want a jobs program (uneconomic work created strictly for the sake of providing income), call it what it is, and at least have people fill potholes, or something else humans are actually better at than machines.

ITB 3y ago

Exactly, this topic requires purposeful journalism. Otherwise it’s just doomerism.

hackinthebochs 3y ago

>The existence of call-center work, which is intrinsically dehumanizing and unrelentingly laborious, is considered a failure of our society. If the existence of these jobs is a failure of our society, what do you call taking these jobs away without any sufficient replacements that pay as well? There are plenty of places in the US where a call center job is the best job you can get without special skills.

Legend2440 3y ago
We will not run out of jobs because there isn't a fixed number of jobs. There's a fixed number of workers. We've been automating jobs for centuries and yet workforce participation has stayed in the 60-70% range. New jobs will always spring into existence to occupy the newly available workers.
- hackinthebochs 3y ago
  There's an approximately fixed number of jobs in time periods meaningful to humans. My rent is not going to wait for new fields to blossom in the wake of "progress".
  - lmm 3y ago
    > There's an approximately fixed number of jobs in time periods meaningful to humans. Bullshit. I've got relatives who can remember when call centers weren't a thing.
  - the_only_law 3y ago
    > My rent is not going to wait for new fields to blossom in the wake of "progress". Don’t worry, you wouldn’t even be qualified for the new jobs anyway, unless ofc they’re low skilled in which case you might barely scrape by on rent.
  - Legend2440 3y ago
    If we didn't do "progress" we'd both still be farming in the dirt and washing our clothes by hand. It's kind of hypocritical to ask for it to stop as soon as it starts inconveniencing you.