Working with Robots – Displaced Workers

The robotic age will necessarily cause many workers to rethink their status in providing a standard of living that we now refer to as being possible with a living wage.WP_20140915_09_03_04_Pro

The question we consider today is:

What cultural changes might be required to advance displaced workers in the Age of Robots?

Culture is, in the words of E.B. Tylor, “that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.”

Most important, what role is anticipated for the displaced worker? There are writings that suggest that one way in which we can compensate for the replacement of the labor of man by robots is to put members of the society on a dole. Presumably, this would be compensated by a tax on the production of the robot. This suggestion, as seen from our paradigm, is problematic as it requires a cultural rethink. This and other suggestions necessary to move forward when working with robots are the reasons we must focus on an altered culture to answer the challenges of the Robotic Age.

In order to get the conversation meant to brainstorm solutions let’s begin with this oft suggested solution “a dole for all to provide the basic necessities of life, assuming health and education a right. (Commonly referred to as sustenance provided by a living wage- food, shelter, etc.)

First, let’s acknowledge that we must start our brainstorming beyond our paradigm else it would seem some communistic plot where failure is a fair projection. With this in mind we might be able to analyze the pros and cons without the baggage of preconceived notions.

Before going much further we should recognize that climate change is a pressing concern for all living on this planet. Therefore, any remedial policy should consider the effect on climate change as a litmus test for proposed solutions .


Suggestion: A dole for all citizens to provide for basic needs.


  • All citizens provided with a subsistence,
  • Elimination of marginal class because of income,
  • Workers will have more time for family and creative projects.

Let’s review a possible outcome of this suggestion.

  • Elimination of marginal class because of income.

Contemplating this– reveals the extraordinary complications when working beyond your paradigm. With our litmus test in mind, we should first define each of the segments of this possible outcome.

  • What do we mean when we say elimination, marginal- class?
  • Is a class made marginal because of insufficient income?
  • Are there other causes for the creation of a marginal class?
  • Must our society contain classes?

You can be assured that the answers to these questions will produce further questions that will necessarily implicate cultural changes that must needs be addressed in order to facilitate a resolute plan of action.


You may ask, “Who is to answer these questions?” We suggest, the best answer is that you are to answer these questions because they involve changes that are cultural in nature and will affect future generations. With regards to climate change, make no mistake, all who live today are responsible for the devastation of the ozone layer. Many of us start as an infant suckling on a nipple attached to a plastic container.


Peoples of the world, hunger, to join the modern age and to have those amenities that are shared by the more privileged. And so, the responsibility for answers to questions regarding climate change, and automation in the workforce fall on those beneficiaries of our modern society. Only when many minds are working to solve problems can we reach a comfort level when working with robots now and in the future.

Working with Robots – Then and Now

“…Americans have always believed in building a better future. Each generation has strived to pass on higher standards of living to their children… In the long run, the critical determinant of living standards is labor productivity—the amount of goods and services produced by an average worker in a fixed period of time…” ((ERP2010), pg. 259-261)

 The 2010 Economic Report of the President (ERP2010) was unequivocal. Still, the 2016 ERP, in part, states:

“… the economy has been changing in profound ways, … Today, technology doesn’t just replace jobs on the assembly line, but rather affects any job where work can be automated… these trends have squeezed workers, making it difficult for middle-class families to feel secure, even when they have jobs and the economy is growing.” ( [pg3-4]

We assume that the President has the ability to have some of the best economists available to guide him. Yet, in 2010 when Robots were hardly an unknown measure of economic change the report states that the living standard determinant is “labor productivity-the amount of goods and services produced by an average worker in a fixed period….” And so, in the report 0f 2016, “trends have squeezed workers, making it difficult for middle-class families to feel secure…”

When we consider that the United States government is charged with protecting the people it’s hard to imagine that economists are unable to project six years in the future. (It may well be a result of the contentiousness in Congress)

An economic commission charged with projecting the health of the United States economy for the next 20 years may resolve this unfortunate lack of foresight.

Various forms of automation have already affected many repetitious jobs and are sure to continue in that path and beyond. This clearly indicates that the standard of living of the future will not be determined by the amount of goods and services produced by an average worker in a fixed period of time.

In order that America can continue to build a better future for the next generations an aggressive effort by government, industry, workers and economist must develop a plan to move us from a society based on the reliance on labor production to a society that will share in its productive output.

In the interim, the American worker must pursue their living wage with planning and foresight. This is especially true of those who expect to enter workforce in the near future. Do not believe that because you may enter a profession that takes many years of educational training and/or apprenticeship that you will not be affected by future automation. It would be better to anticipate cross training. Just take a look back to where automation was 20 years ago and imagine what it might be like in the next 20 years of exponential growth. Your future might depend on how much you know about designing/building/programming robots.

Not all of us will be so lucky. What will happen to those workers displaced by automation? We will continue this conversation in our next post. Please let us hear from you with ideas that might answer this absorbing question.


Working with Robots – Displaced Workers




A Living Wage Vs Robots

“It’s a good bet that the field of robotics is poised to … ultimately produce robots geared toward nearly every conceivable commercial, industrial, and consumer task.”

The Rise of Robots…Martin Ford

The Living Wage Project did not envision the outrage found during research of wages paid in America. Unfortunately, this outrage is undoubtedly a worldwide phenomenon. We feel that it is morally reprehensible that an employer will pay a wage that does not permit their employee to sustain the benefits necessary for shelter, food, transportation, clothing, healthcare and education. In fact, our research has found that in some cases companies that pay these wages refer their employees to government-sponsored food stamp programs and other welfare. All, to benefit the corporate bottom line.

Of course, we cannot agree with this concept; that the bottom line does not include the welfare of the employee. That is why, for the most part, we have been diverted from our primary mission – to elucidate and guide the worker toward their living wage.

Unfortunately, the greed that our research has exposed is the very subject that frames the argument concerning a living wage. The employee is not without fault when they find themselves working for less than a living wage. In the final analysis, the employer could not perpetrate the outrage without the employee’s participation. I would suggest that any employee that finds themselves in the situation should start looking for new employment or mobilize to facilitate change as soon as possible.

The Age of Robots

A more pressing concern for workers around the world is the effect of their displacement by robots. This is especially true in countries with very large populations such as China and India, but certainly adversely affects the American worker. When expanding this to its logical conclusion questions arise, such as, what will those presently employed and displaced by robots do for a living wage? Answers to such questions stretch the imagination so that we must brainstorm beyond our paradigm. This is not something easily engaged by government decision-makers and social workers swamped by existing concerns. When viewed in this light the employment structure based on greed takes on greater significance.

Without question, the corporate giants are aware of the bearing of Robots in the workplace. The educational institutions are mostly mute on this matter. Whether this is because they would not want to discourage financial contributions from the corporations, or because, they are genuinely not interested in the welfare of the American worker remains to be determined. Clearly, this is a primary social – economic concern only outpaced by solutions to climate change.

 Working with Robots

We will continue this dialogue in future posts. We invite you to join the conversation. Do you know of a possible answer to this pressing concern?



The Living Wage and the Transpacific Partnership (TPP)

 “The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) levels the playing field for American workers and American businesses, leading to more Made-in-America exports and more higher-paying American jobs here at home. By cutting over 18,000 taxes various countries put on Made-in-America products, TPP makes sure our farmers, ranchers, manufacturers and small businesses can compete— and win—in some of the fastest growing markets in the world. With more than 95 percent of the world’s consumers living outside our borders, TPP will significantly expand the export of Made-in-America goods and services and support American jobs.” (

The meaningless paragraph above is the propaganda put out by the office of the United States Trade Representative. This office is headed by Michael Froman who worked at the White House during the formulation of NAFTA and is now Pres. Obama’s “principal advisor, negotiator and spokesperson on international trade and investment issues.” Mr. Froman’s credentials include service in a number of roles at Citigroup, Citigroup Inc. or Citi, the ‘world’s global bank’, a senior fellow on the Council of Foreign Relations and a Fellow at the German Marshall Fund.  Citi has had much news coverage since the Wall Street debacle of 2007. Much of the wealth of the American worker was lost during this “Great Recession”. Now, under the tutorship of Mr. Froman and his cronies Pres. Obama is on the brink of destroying what is left to the American worker – the Hope of an opportunity for a decent paying job that provides a living wage.

 “(TPP) levels the playing field for American workers”

I guess if Froman is talking about the workers named Corbat, CEO, Citi; Dimon, CEO, Chase; or Blankfein, CEO, Goldman Sachs we would have to take this is a true statement. But if he’s talking about the American worker in the industrial sector I believe 20 Pinocchio’s wouldn’t be enough to describe this statement. Who is it that he expects would believe such rubbish? Nor would it take a long investigation to determine who Mr. Froman’s target is for “more higher-paying American jobs here at home”. Clearly, he is not talking about the American worker subjected to competition for the meager amounts left to the middle class.

To fully understand the outrageous assertions of the TPP we should examine Mr. Froman’s claims found in the Protecting Workers-Fact Sheet. (Supra)

Protect the freedom to form unions and bargain collectively.

Before the United States signs such an agreement we must first have a Constitutional Amendment. Recentt events in Wisconsin reveal bargaining collectively is not a right in the United States. Also, how could  the United States sign an agreement that would protect the freedom to form unions? We certainly have not been successful in the United States through many years effort. This “freedom” is not available to workers when the wealth of the Koch brothers and the Walton family is applied against forming a workers union.

Recent headlines from Washington D.C reveal that Walmart threatened the City- in effect saying that if the Council passed a living wage requirement they would not build the planned stores in DC. A living wage does not come close to collective bargaining. If we put this wage in perspective, it would take a worker 1.5 million years to amass the wealth of just one Walton billionaire. The average Walmart worker would need to labor 6 million years to amass the wealth of the Walton family. Still, their namesake company has as a policy that refuses to build in an area that requires a living wage. The idea that the worker would be free to form unions and bargain collectively is a farfetched exaggeration or an outright lie.

Eliminate exploitative child labor and forced labor.

The USA has enacted Laws that prohibit child and forced labor. Still, there are reports of child labor, slavery and indentured servitude among the migrant and undocumented workers in the United States.

  • Protect against employment discrimination.

Without a definition of ’employment discrimination’ this is a meaningless phrase.

Require laws on acceptable conditions of work related to minimum wages, hours of work, and occupational safety and health.

The key words here are “acceptable conditions”. The only acceptable conditions for the American worker is that all of these conditions should be equal in each of the participating countries. It is only then that the American worker can play on an equal playing field.

  • Prevent the degradation of labor protections in export processing zones.

These are just words without meaning when not accompanied by definitions. It’s like telling a reader that I will go outside without worry about sunburn omitting the details of when or what going outside entails.

  • Combat trade in goods made by forced labor in countries inside and outside TPP.

Once again the devil is in the details. The signatories of this agreement seem to imply a new United Nations. How bold it is of them to subject nations not signatories to their agreement? Very bold, a condition that implies policing of member and non-member States.

  • Establish a transparent and responsive process to allow for labor unions, advocates, and other stakeholders to raise concerns regarding any TPP country’s adherence to the labor commitments.

Well isn’t that nice? This agreement is going to allow labor advocates to raise concerns. That’s it folks, start raising concerns.

  • TPP also includes separate, comprehensive commitments by Vietnam, Malaysia, and Brunei to ensure compliance with the high labor standards included in TPP

What are the high labor standards? What is the minimum wage, hours of work and occupational safety and health standard? Will they be equal in all countries? Will they meet the standards in the United States of America? If they do not meet the standards of the United States of America, now and in the future, this is not a fair agreement for the American Worker.

  • Mexico is also developing parallel labor reforms, including to better protect collective bargaining and reform its system for administering labor justice.

If Mexico does not develop labor reforms that meet the standards of the United States of America now and in the future this is not a fair agreement for the American Worker.

  • TPP renegotiates NAFTA, putting fundamental labor rights at the core of the agreement, and making those rights fully enforceable through the same type of dispute settlement as other obligations, including the option to impose trade sanctions.

Renegotiate NAFTA? The USA should remove its name as a signatory to that agreement which has already cost millions of American industrial worker jobs and gave multinational corporations an opportunity to relocate to other countries for cheaper labor opportunities and free importation into the USA.

  • These rights include freedom of association, the right to collective bargaining, prohibitions on and effective elimination of child and forced labor, and protection against employment discrimination. And for the first time in a trade agreement, TPP requires countries to adopt laws on minimum wages, hours of work, and occupational safety and health.

Once again, unless the laws adopted requiring minimum wages hours of work and occupational safety and health are equal in each of the countries signatory to this agreement that is not an equal playing field. Although this applies mainly to the USA at this time it might soon include other countries more advanced than the other signatories of this agreement.

With respect to Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei, who are first-time signatories to a trade agreement with the United States, TPP contains country-specific labor reform commitments to meet their TPP obligations that are themselves subject to dispute settlement.

So what? Does all trade cease during dispute settlement? If not this is just another meaningless assertion.

  • Furthermore, TPP requires each TPP country to establish a public submission process to allow for labor unions, advocates, and other stakeholders to raise specific concerns related to any TPP country’s adherence to the commitments under the labor chapter.

Raising concerns does not resolve disputes. Without the necessary equal labor requirements the concerns are already raised the resolutions are the lacking ingredient.

  • By bringing enforceable commitments on fundamental labor rights into our trading relationships with TPP countries, TPP expands the fight for decent work around the world and creates a more fair and level playing field for American workers.

Although the TPP may expand the fight for decent work around the world it does not create anything comparable to a fair and level playing field for American workers. The fact that each participant has not already expanded labor rights in their countries speaks volumes to the probably success of the proposed TPP.

  • TPP puts into place the largest expansion of enforceable labor rights in history, more than quadrupling the number of people outside the United States that are covered by enforceable labor provisions. This expansion helps make it more likely that strong labor provisions in trade agreements will become the new global standard.

Unless the labor provisions of the new global standard are equal to those provisions already provided to the American worker the largest expansion of enforceable labor rights cannot be seen as any benefit to the American worker.

As can be seen from the brief above the TPP does not offer the American worker a fair and equal playing field with the workers in the countries signatory to this agreement. It is as though Pres. Obama and Representative Froman have forgotten that the economic health of the free world depends in large part on the economic health of the middle class of the United States of America.

The TPP as written must be defeated if America’s middle class is to have any chance to rebound from the devastation caused by the poor decisions of our political leaders over the last 40 years. This is not a political Party issue–this is an American Middle Class issue. Please contact your representatives.

Say NO to TPP!

A Living Wage vs. Higher Education

The purpose of higher education

Prior to examining the effects of higher education on a living wage we turn first to the purpose of higher education. There is today much discussion as to what the purpose of higher education should be but there is little doubt that the purpose of higher education today is limited to preparing the student for the global marketplace.


Traditional notions of the purpose of the university, imbued with ambiguous aims and including knowledge generation and service to society, have been scrutinized and transformed into neoliberal objectives that are more easily articulated for policymakers (Weick, 1976/2000; Pfeffer, 1977/2000; Cohen & March, 1986/2000; Kezar, 2005; Fallis, 2008). (Repoliticizing Higher Education Assessment within Neoliberal Globalization Hursh, David; Wall, Andrew F. – Policy Futures in Education, 2011)

Public education was founded with the intent purpose of preparing a workforce for the 20th century industrial workforce.

The burden of higher education

If the purpose of higher education is a de-facto preparation for competition in the global market then the costs for this preparation should be viewed as a development in favor of competition in the global marketplace. When viewed as a development in favor of competition in the global marketplace it begs the question: “Who are the beneficiaries of higher education?” There is little doubt that the student gains knowledge but that seems to be of little consequence except when he applies that knowledge to the workplace.


I suggest that in today’s workaday world the beneficiary of higher education is the capitalist. This is borne out by the all too often publicized unequal distribution of income and the plight of society’s middle-class. It follows that the burden of higher education should be placed squarely on those who profit most but not on the student and potential worker or the struggling families thereof.


President Obama has already proposed that all community colleges be tuition free. At least one 2016 presidential candidate is proposing that all public education be tuition free. The resistance to these proposals comes from those who benefit most from our public education system. It may be, that in the future this resistance will ease when the benefit of an inclusive workforce to business is fully assessed.


For the worker today there is little time to consider the purpose of or who should bear the burden of the cost of education. What the worker must know is that their quest for a living wage is dependent on the preparation required to do the task at hand. Still, they must look to the future when possible and involve themselves in the political process. The worker should consider voting a duty of citizenship and a means to support those issues that are meaningful to their living wage.




A Living Wage Vs. The Global Labor Market

  • At times the light,
  • offers comfort,
  • only in,
  • reflection

Have you ever noticed what the odds are to win a lotto? The odds are already known by the producers of the lotto tickets. They are masters of the ‘numbers’ game. Still, even at a chance for success of 2 million to 1, people continue to buy a lotto ticket. They are driven by advertisements and news stories of the successful winners. There are few posts that tell the story of the worker who spends five and 10% of his weekly income with hopes of success in the lotto market. Money better spent contributing to the health and well-being of their wards.

What are the odds of a worker in the United States to make a living wage in the global labor market? Or put another way, how does a worker in the United States compete with a comparable worker of another country with an average 2015 income of $400 per month? This is the dilemma of the American worker today.

When I read posts of the pros and cons of free trade agreements between America and other countries with lower standards of living it seems that most articles brush over the detrimental effects to the American worker. These trade agreements certainly benefit those of lesser developed countries who are able to produce goods for export at lower prices. Those in the USA that are not affected by the loss of their job look at this as a benefit for they can buy more for less. This is not true of the worker in the USA that either has lost their job or is forced into a lower paying field of work.

If the NAFTA agreement had ensured that those workers in Canada and Mexico would be paid on the same scale as those workers in the USA it may have been a fair agreement. This was not the case, and many factories that were once located in the USA have relocated to Mexico or Canada. The countries of Canada and Mexico readily agreed to NAFTA and saw it as a boom to their countries economy. This may well be the case in the short term. However, neither the worker in Canada nor Mexico is much better off.

The economic gains to these countries was sucked off by the globalized corporations but not passed down to the workers of these companies. For when it became convenient the companies once welcomed with lavish tax incentives move their factories to other countries paying even less compensation to their workers.

And so, in the short term both Canada and Mexico had seen gains. The USA suffered a demise in the industrial workforce and consequent payroll reduction. These schemes are unsustainable in the long term. As the USA worker compensation remains stagnant or is reduced so too is the viability of any free trade agreement. The USA worker affected by this Treaty can only conclude that NAFTA is a dismal failure. The same might be said of any trade agreement that does not consider the USA standard of living as a basis of wages paid in the treaty partner countries.

Today, as the campaign for a new president of the USA is in full swing we have candidates from both parties who view Free Trade Agreements detrimental to creating good paying jobs in the United States. It is doubtful that either Sanders or Trump could agree on many other public policies. They do agree that contributions to our elected officials drives public policy. I would suggest that even honest politicians have failed to take the care necessary to understand all of the facts and underlying detrimental consequences of a free trade policy to the American worker.

Labor in the leading industrial countries of the world are threatened by the globalization of the labor market. Free trade agreements are not the answer to these countries for although they do benefit the developing and underdeveloped countries of the world they do not benefit the workers of those industrialized countries. The problem, then, is how we move forward with the globalization of the world markets without unduly jeopardizing the standard of living in the existing industrial countries. The answer is complicated. However, we cannot assume destroying the standard of living in the most industrialized countries of the world is an acceptable policy. This is a result of uncompensated free trade agreements, such as NAFTA.

Finally, it takes energy to solve problems. What we should demand of our political leaders is that they put aside the contributions that put them in office and look at their job as American-Statesman but not as harlots being bought for the highest price. If your representative does not expend the necessary energy to move this country forward, you have the responsibility to vote them out of office. It’s not enough for them to say, “I’m voting in favor of this corporate policy because it will create more jobs”. If they favor globalization of the labor market, by casting a vote favoring free trade agreements, they are at odds with the American worker, you should not vote for them. What affects your neighbor today, will affect you tomorrow.

The Living Wage on Labor Day

Today is a celebration of Labor. It is meant to honor all those men and women who work hard to make this country great. If you have been or are among that number please hold your head up high and look to your fellow workers to thank them for doing their part.

Necessarily, on a personal level we look at work as a means to support ourselves and our family. But the broader picture reveals that it is the worker that is the engine of our society. We are encourage by children tales of the Little Tug or Locomotive that never quits, moving forward for the greater good.

Although many of our politicians seem to have forgotten this they do so on a wobbly foundation. Those politicians who would deny a worker a living wage are caught up in yesterday’s smoke-filled rooms that now is replaced by the billionaire’s palace. They sell your vote in favor of bucks to feed their campaign for reelection. The billionaires own most media outlets yet through the social revolution, which is the Internet, they are being exposed, finally, brought to the light of day.

And so, I say to all those workers struggling for fair compensation keep moving forward, you are not alone, learn to join in the effort to push this load to the Apex.

Have a good Labor Day stay safe.

A Living Wage –Exploration of Considerations

Most would not have to think very long to know what to do when encountering an alligator. When the alligator takes its prey it might kill by crushing its meal between its powerful jaws or it may take it for a spin underwater. After which, the prey is consumed whole and digested by this reptilian beast.gator Most can, with due consideration, evade its powerful grasp. I will not here develop in detail how to avoid the alligator’s terror. It is sufficient to say, avoid contact. Fortunately, most of us will not be concerned with avoiding the reptilian beast. However, there is a social beast sewn by your life choices. That is the beast of poverty, which affects your nutrition, your health, your shelter, your transportation, your education. It is this beast that this post addresses.

How does one avoid the powerful grasp of living your life in the lower social economic status of our society? To begin you must first earn enough to sustain both you and your wards. As calculated, this amount would be termed your living wage. A subsistence amount that includes enough compensation to provide adequate shelter, food, clothing, healthcare, transportation and education.

Unfortunately, the age that we must make decisions affecting our living wage is one complicated by other interests. That is to say that when we are in high school we should be preparing for our initial rendezvous with the outside world. I daresay, not many folks in high school have gained enough information to make formidable decisions regarding their financial status for the coming years. And thus those closest to them are their guides to the future.

The decision-making process is more complicated when that person is in the lower social economic status of our society. A status that views poverty as a normal paradigm. Which translates to a condition that views economic success most often as beyond reach. Without the help of community to address these concerns those locked in the jaws of poverty are destined not only to remain in this condition but to pass it on to the next generation. The decision-making process, that includes a reward for real life decisions that lead to success, should be a basic part of our primary education.

Considerations for a Living Wage

What are the considerations for a living wage? Many complain that they are not earning a living wage and are overwhelmed by this financial condition. Are you earning enough compensation to support your life choices? Have you considered the possibilities necessary to alleviate a day to day, week to week existence? Maybe not, most of us make assumptions about career choices, family choices, housing choices, education choices, transportation choices etc. without a thorough understanding of the consequences. Most important, when considering these choices is the understanding of the financial costs associated with these life’s choices. To that end, your occupation selection will affect the successful attainment of your goals. Knowledgeable decisions about any future occupation selection is paramount.

Before going through the occupation selection process you would benefit to think long and hard about what it is that you like to do. Have you ever thought that your favorite hobby should be what you are doing for your income? Do you think of going to work as a grind, a chore, which you have to get through? The closer you can get to the type of work that you like to do the more likely it will be that your work will not be such a grind.

For those already employed, start by examining what it is that you like and dislike about your present career choice. When you have completed this self-examination and have computed the amount of compensation necessary to produce what you determine your living wage you should select an occupation that best suits your needs and desires. Below, we have formulated a track that should help you in the process of your occupation selection.

The Keys to Occupation Selection (PLENS)

  1. Physical: Are you physically able to perform the tasks necessary in the occupation under consideration? Employers are required under the ADA to accommodate deficiencies provided that with these accommodations you can perform the task. There are probably many things that a paraplegic can do, chances are being a Fireman is not one of them. It is important not to discount occupations because you have a physical impairment. This is one reason for the importance of examination of the occupation you aspire. Still, impairment is not the only reason to consider the physical requirements of an occupation. Some occupations require a lifting burden, or standing – sitting for long hours, etc. It is for you to decide if the occupation’s physical requirements meet your preferences.

2.) Location: Is the occupation under consideration available in a location that you would like to live and work? Is your preferred location a rural, suburban or urban area? Do you prefer a warm climate or does snow excite your senses? Does the occupation require travel or long periods away from friends and family? Can you perform the work from your home office?

3.) Education: Have you or can you obtain the education necessary to perform the occupation under consideration? Is there an educational requirement for this occupation that you can meet? If not, are you capable of preparing by completing this education requirement? Don’t sell yourself short. If the occupation requires more education than you presently have looked to serve an apprenticeship in the chosen field while at the same time completing the education requirement.

4.) Need: What are the current and future needs of the occupation under consideration? What are the future projections for this occupation? Is this an occupation that is growing or waning? This is something that we can determine based on Department of Labor projections.

5.) Setting: Is the work setting one that suits your interests? Is the occupation selected performed indoors, outdoors or a combination of both? Does the occupation require travel to danger zones? Can you do the work from home?

The questions above and others should be answered on a personal level. This is a personal occupation selection. The happier you are with your work the more likely it will be a success. Your main obligation is to strive to be the best that you can be in whatever field you choose.

Applying Keys to Occupation Selection

To examine the keys above let’s presume that after due consideration regarding occupations you have decided that you would like to pursue a career as a graphic designer. In this regard we will apply the questions who, what, where, when and how in our examination of the graphic designer. That is to say we will apply the questions: Who are graphic designer? What do graphic designers do? Where do graphic designers work? When do graphic designers work? How are graphic designers compensated? United States Department of Labor Occupational Outlook Handbook has the answer to many of these questions. (DOL Occupational Outlook Handbook Graphic Designers)


A look at the link above indicates that the graphic designer occupation is reviewed as; Summary, What They Do, Work Environment, How to Become One, Pay, Job Outlook, Similar Occupations, More Info. These links answer many of the questions we posed above. (Please Note: Given the rise of the 3-D printer availability in recent years we think the DOL job outlook projections for this occupation may be revised upward in the coming months.)

Moving further, say that for all intents and purposes the graphic designer occupation is one that you would select. However, you do not meet the educational requirements for this occupation. You should not view this as an impossible obstacle to your goal. Rather, should investigate how best to complete the education requirements for this occupation. In this regard, it may be best to seek out a mentor that is working as a graphic designer. That person may well have been in the same position that you are in now. Whether that condition existed for that person they still might be your best bet for help given your common interest in graphic design.