Creating productive jobs matters

What use is Lee’s slogan on public wellbeing or Han’s demand for future capability if they can’t create jobs?

Lee Sang-ryeolThe author is a senior editorial writer of the JoongAng Ilbo. The income-led growth tenet, artificial intelligence, robotics and recession bring about a common impact on the job market. They reduce jobs.

The experiment of guiding economic policy based on the income-driven growth model from the previous Moon Jae-in administration had caused a far-reaching upset to the job market. Small- and mid-sized employers and the self-employed who could not keep up with the sudden spike in the minimum wage had to shutter their businesses or cut payroll. Hiring revolved around short-term recruits for less than 15 hours per week to avoid paying the minimum wage. The Korean economy remains strained under high labor costs.

AI is actively stealing jobs and stretching its substitution of human labor in call centers, freelance translation and many other areas as it deepens encroachment in various sectors. According to a recent Bank of Korea (BOK) report, about 12 percent of existing jobs in the country, or 3.41 million occupations, are at risk of being replaced by AI technologies. State think tank Korea Development Institute (KDI) estimates that more than 90 percent of tasks in 90 percent of current professions will be automated by 2030.

Robotics and self-service kiosks are rapidly replacing human labor. Korea has an exceptionally high robot density. As of 2022, robot units totaled 1,012 per 10,000 employees — a whopping 6.7 times higher than the global average of 151 units.

The double salvo of flawed policy direction and new innovations has caused serious havoc on the Korean job market. Despite the evident shortage of regular jobs, the surge in temporary gigs has caused the illusion of a record-high employment rate.

Job security has been — and will always be — the best welfare. Yet few politicians are paying attention to the crumbling job market.

Former Democratic Party (DP) leader Lee Jae-myung, who is unchallenged in his rebid for the chairmanship of the majority party, vowed to make improving the wellbeing of ordinary people his top political priority. “Growth recovery and sustainable growth are the basis for wellbeing,” he said while declaring his rebid for the next chairmanship. He could be right. But he didn’t specify the details of how. He pledged to enhance basic science and future technologies through state investment and increase the share of renewables in the energy pie. They are essential — but not enough to propel an economy ranking among the world’s top-10.

His logic is also hard to follow. He claimed that the state inevitably must take more responsibility for all the basic necessities — income, housing, education and healthcare, for instance — to pave the way for a “basic income” society because AI and robotics are fast replacing human labor and reducing jobs. However, can our society really live off basic income? And where would the money come from? Can all the entitlements be sustainable if the government collects more taxes from companies and issues more debts? He worries about the decline in jobs but does not provide effective solutions to create new ones.

Jobs are made by the private sector. Lee does not have any plans to stimulate companies and entrepreneurship. Lee and the DP still adhere to their antibusiness stance. Instead, they are pushing for the passage of highly volatile bills aimed at encouraging illegal strikes at worksites. If Lee is true to the slogan of making people’s livelihoods better, he must focus on creating jobs first and drop his antibusiness position.

The governing People Power Party (PPP) is even more pitiful. The conservative party does not present tangible ways to create productive jobs. Generating quality jobs should be the start of the urgent conservative mission of easing disparities and restoring the social ladder of opportunities. In his acceptance speech on Tuesday, new PPP leader Han Dong-hoon urged the conservative party to become “more capable” for the future. But he stopped short of presenting any visions to create quality jobs.

Jobs are at the center of the global economic war. The Chips and Science Act, the Inflation Reduction Act and the tariff bomb are all about defending jobs in the United States. What strategy does Korea have? What use is Lee’s slogan on public wellbeing or Han’s demand for future capability if they can’t create jobs?