Judith Velasco, Director of the Verdugo Workforce Development Board, was a presenter on the STEPS to Employment Training Panel in Sacramento today. Joining her were Senator Anthony Portantino; Glendale Community College Board of Trustee Member, Tony Tartaglia; Dr. Michael Ritterborwn, Vice President of Instructional Services at Glendale Community College (and Verdugo Board Member); Kim Edelman, Executive Director of the Professional Development Center of GCC and Karine Grigoryan, Executive Director of the Glendale Youth Alliance.
Sometimes, everything old is new again. Nonetheless, we were startled to find out that the wage gap between male and female nonprofit Executive Directors and CEO’s got worse in 2018, in spite of some progress in 2017. In this years’s Compensation + Benefits Survey, the gap had risen to a difference of about $30K annually – a big jump. This is despite the fact that 67% of ED’s and CEO’s are female. We’re curious about this trend, since the nonprofit workforce is 70% women, and especially light of all the activity around female leaders speaking out. Weigh in! Talk to us on our social media channels: we’d like to hear your opinion on how to reduce that gap. This is only one of the illuminating facts from this year’s survey.
Want more? Order your copy now fro the Center for Nonprofit Management.
from Industry Week Magazine:
As the economy continues to improve, employers will invest greater sums into the training and development of their employees.
More training and development will be utilized to fill the gaps in employee skill sets and will help companies work to full capacity in an improving economy. This will be essential for Generation Z employees, who are demonstrating a soft skills gap in the workplace.
Technological/AI advancements will continue to influence the workplace.
Trends that began in 2017 will accelerate in 2018, affecting employment opportunities across the board. Examples include fast food chains adding ordering kiosks and warehouses using automated order pickers. Chatbots – programs that facilitate text conversations – are expected to save companies millions of dollars in salary expenditures annually, as will similar forms of artificial intelligence.
From Yahoo Finance News: On Thursday, the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) provided a good reason for us to think carefully about the evolution of facial-recognition technology. In a study, the group used Amazon’s (AMZN) Rekognition service to compare portraits of members of Congress to 25,000 arrest mugshots. The result: 28 members were mistakenly matched with 28 suspects.
The ACLU isn’t the only group raising the alarm about the technology. Earlier this month, Microsoft (MSFT) president Brad Smith posted an unusual plea on the company’s blogasking that the development of facial-recognition systems not be left up to tech companies.
Saying that the tech “raises issues that go to the heart of fundamental human rights protections like privacy and freedom of expression,” Smith called for “a government initiative to regulate the proper use of facial recognition technology, informed first by a bipartisan and expert commission.”
But we may not get new laws anytime soon. The nuances are complex, while Congress remains as reluctant as ever to regulate privacy. We may find ourselves stuck struggling to agree on norms well after the technology has redefined everything from policing to marketing.
from Clive Thompson at Wired Magazine July 2018
Technology impinges upon every part of our civic sphere. We’ve got police using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to determine which neighborhoods to patrol, Facebook filtering the news, and automation eroding the job market. Smart policy could help society adapt. But to tackle these issues Congressfolk [and all legislators and government administrators] will first have to understand them. It’s cringe-inducing to have senators like Orrin Hatch seem unaware that Facebook makes money from ads.
Our legislators need help. They need a gang of smart, informed nerds in their corner. Which means it’s time to reboot the Office of Technology Assessment…. The OTA was Capitol Hill’s original brain trust on tech. Congress established the office in 1972, the year of Pong, when it realized the application of technology was becoming “extensive, pervasive and critical.” The OTA was staffed with several hundred nonpartisan propellerheads who studied emerging science and tech. Every year they’d write numerous clear detailed reports–What happens if Detroit gets hit with an atom bomb? What’ll be the impact of automation?– and they were on call to help any congressperson.
It worked admirably. Its reports helped save money and lives: The OTA found that by expanding Medicaid to all pregnant women in poverty would lower the cost of treatment for low birth weight babies by as much as $30,000 per birth. It pointed out the huge upsides for paying for rural broadband, and of preparing for climate change. With a budget of only $20 million a year, the little agency had an outsize impact.
Alas, the OTA was doomed by the very clarity of its insight. It concluded that Reagan’s “Star Wars” missile defense wouldn’t work–which annoyed some Republicans. In 1995, when Newt Gingrich embarked on his mission of reducing government spending, the low-profile agency got the chop, at precisely the wrong time: Congress defunded its tech advisor just as life was about to be utterly transfigured by the Internet, mobile phones, social networking and AI (artificial intelligence). Nice work, guys!
Today Washingtonians of different stripes are calling for a re-boot. Continue reading “Why Government & Policymakers Need Tech Advisors & Their Disbanded Tech Advisory Board”
Three questions on retraining and the future of work with economist Jay Shambaugh.
What can individual workers do to better prepare themselves for the workplace of the future?
The silliest but probably most honest one is stay in school. I am a total believer that for the economy as a whole, education is not a sufficient way to solve wage-growth problems. But for an individual, it is. For an individual, the more education you have, the lower your unemployment rate and the higher the wages will be over your career. The other thing is to back politicians and policies that are supportive of what you think you need in your working life.
Who do you think has the responsibility to retrain workers, and who do you think is doing it effectively?
for full article click here