The article seeks to open up a critical discussion around the idea of emotional labour as skilled work. It has been suggested by some commentators that many front-line service jobs, traditionally thought of as low skilled in terms of their technical aspects, may actually constitute a form of skilled work, since they require their holders to perform skilled emotional labour in their dealings with customers. Such discourses hold out the possibility of progress not only in intellectual terms but also with regard to improving the status and pay of many low-waged service workers. The article subjects these claims to critical scrutiny and argues that applying the label 'skill' to all forms of emotion work is extremely problematic.
Current debates around robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) are dominated by concerns over the threat to employment, amid widely varying estimates of potential job losses. Countries are expected to fare differently, but there is little comparative research that goes beyond analysing industry and occupational structures. This article rethinks ‘country effects’ by exploring the role of institutions and social actors in shaping technological change in Norway and the UK. Drawing upon interviews with technology experts, employer associations and trade unions, it examines their perspectives on public policy support for the development and diffusion of robotics and AI, along with potential consequences for employment, work and skills. The research indicates significant country differences and the continued relevance of institutions, interests and power in analysing country effects.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.