Slashdot Mirror
Just 14 People Make 500,000 Tons of Steel a Year in Austria (bloomberg.com)
An anonymous reader shares a Bloomberg Businessweek feature: The Austrian village of Donawitz has been an iron-smelting center since the 1400s, when ore was dug from mines carved out of the snow-capped peaks nearby. Over the centuries, Donawitz developed into the Hapsburg Empire's steel-production hub, and by the early 1900s it was home to Europe's largest mill. With the opening of Voestalpine AG's new rolling mill this year, the industry appears secure. What's less certain are the jobs. The plant, a two-hour drive southwest of Vienna, will need just 14 employees to make 500,000 tons of robust steel wire a year -- vs. as many as 1,000 in a mill with similar capacity built in the 1960s. Inside the facility, red-hot metal snakes its way along a 700-meter (2,297-foot) production line. Yet the floors are spotless, the only noise is a gentle hum that wouldn't overwhelm a quiet conversation, and most of the time the place is deserted except for three technicians who sit high above the line, monitoring output on a bank of flatscreens. "We have to forget steel as a core employer," says Wolfgang Eder, Voestalpine's chief executive officer for the past 13 years. "In the long run we will lose most of the classic blue-collar workers, people doing the hot and dirty jobs in coking plants or around the blast furnaces. This will all be automated."
They are jealous of our democracy
I haven't gone looking, but I'd be interested to see what happened to the economy of a 600+ year old steel town.
It's OK because Donald Trump will retrain the steel workers so they can get a job at Blockbuster Video.
Why didn't they just employ thousands of people that just work for a few minutes a day? Oh yeah, reality kicked in. -_-
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
"We have to forget steel as a core employer," says Wolfgang Eder, Voestalpine's chief executive officer for the past 13 years. "In the long run we will lose most of the classic blue-collar workers, people doing the hot and dirty jobs in coking plants or around the blast furnaces. This will all be automated."
Tell me something I don't know like, for example, how will the economy work when 90% of the jobs are automated. Will we have a situation like in ancient Rome where the rich people who owned masses of slaves they used to bankrupt small businesses and farmers by undercutting them with cheap labour but then ended up feeding the unemployed citizen masses simply out of a deep rooted and very real fear of the unwashed citizen masses rising up, dragging the moneyed classes out of their luxury villas and either throwing them to the lions or just crucifying them in the atrium of their own luxury villa? Will our unemployed kids and grand kids be living off of handouts from the rich oligarchs who own the automated factories? ... and how will an economy work when only 10% or less of the population are employed either designing new robots or staring at flatscreen making sure that things are running smoothly?
Far more than fourteen people will be employed maintaining the machines. The industries necessary to produce the robots, including semiconductors, software, materials, lubricants, etc, need employees.
I know people that used to work in steel mills years ago. You don't want those jobs! They are horribly dangerous!
One of the stories involved two coworkers walking on a catwalk above the blast furnace in full heat suits (think Jamie's suit from Mythbusters). One of the workers leaned on the railing and it let go. He was vaporized before he hit the surface of the steel.
The stories like this go on and on. People crushed between rail cars, etc. Sure, the steel industry paid really well, because it had to. The working conditions were so terrible, no one would work there otherwise.
This kind of extreme work environment is ideal for automation. I'd rather see a robot get destroyed in an accident than a person killed.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
They are making steel wire. Operating one machine.
All those people need to be paid, and that cost is passed along the supply chain.
So there can't be that many of them or there'd be no cost saving in automation.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
There is only one thing to do to give some hope the wretched masses yearning to breath free.
Make it legal for people to sell any surplus organs they might have. The lazy bums don't need both the left eye and the right eye. Right?
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
There are 5.2 million acres of forests, woodlands, and trees in Kansas that occupy 10 percent of the state’s total land area. These forests resources can be described as rural forests (2.2 million acres), agroforests (2 million acres of windbreaks, shelterbelts, streamside forests and fence rows), and community forests (1 million acres). Ninety-five percent of the State’s rural forest is privately owned. The remaining five percent is under the ownership and control of public agencies such as the Kansas Department of Wildlife, Parks and Tourism, and the U.S. Department of Defense and Corp of Engineers.
According to the USDA Forest Service, Kansas’ private forests are owned by 117,000 families and individuals. Sixty-five percent of these owners hold fewer than 10 acres of forestland. Fortunately, however, sixty-five percent of the State’s forest acreage is in ownership sizes of 10 – 99 acres and twenty-five percent in ownerships of more than 100 acres.
I wouldn't have thought that there was even one person who made 500,000 tons of steel?!?
If it's dangerous and/or boring, it's better to have a machine do it.
Machines are getting better at a lot of things. My first time through college, I got a decent amount of PLC training, but those units are now entirely obsolete. Machine vision was a thing back then, but you needed a highly-specialized $6,000 ISA card just to grab frames and analyze them. Now, you can do it with a potato-grade webcam and a Raspberry Pi.
I went back to school to get updated on as much as possible since I want to do maintenance now that Electronics and PC Repair have both taken a massive shit with everything moving toward being disposable. The maintenance guys I've met are all retiring and companies are aching to hire young blood. On top of that, industrial control boards still use through-hole components for durability reasons and I can repair that stuff in my sleep.
In a world of the blind, the one-eyed man is king--and the two-eyed man is a heretic.
I haven't gone looking, but I'd be interested to see what happened to the economy of a 600+ year old steel town.
That's an interesting question, but not the central one here, looking at the big picture.
People in the West fret about machines taking their jobs...but it's not people in the West who are going to be most affected. Yes, there will be people who will be stuck "in between" - their jobs will be automated away, but they will be too old / not adept enough to retrain for a new job (or simply, no one will want to hire them even if they do, for whatever reason). Western countries are however rich enough to take care of those people - yes, relatively speaking, for them it will suck, going from a job to being on the dole until retirement, but this will be a small % of the population.
It's all the aspiring immigrants from poorer countries that will be screwed. Countries like Austria have been importing labour for the blue-collar jobs since the 1950s. Even as the post-war economic boom slowed down, they needed to continue due to dwindling fertility levels (avg. EU TFR 1.58 births/woman - below replacement). If these jobs are automated, it won't be the locals missing out - it will be the prospective immigrants. Western countries might just severely restrict immigration (and accept only small numbers of highly qualified individuals).
This is a problem, not directly for the West, but for the Third World. When the West "poaches" highly qualified people (engineers, scientists, doctors) from the Third World, this is usually great for the West and for those individuals, but terrible for the Third World (which is loosing its most qualified people, of whom it almost always has a shortage and pays a relative fortune to train). Remittances are the only way the Third World profits in that case, usually. However when the West takes in unqualified manual labourers, it's often a win-win-win situation: the West fills jobs it cannot fill with its local population; the immigrants get a higher standard of living; and the Third World replaces often unemployable people who are a social/political problem with money-sending expats. Those who remain there can even, in some cases, benefit from the reduction of the labour pool as wages go up.
Not to mention outsourcing, which is "immigrantless immigration" or "job emigration" - Western countries send over the jobs instead of bringing in people. So what happens when demand for such imported labour in the West disappears? What happens when Western multinationals realize it's cheaper to produce locally in automated 20-people factories than somewhere far away (where labour is cheap but from where transportation costs may be high)? Some (many?) Third World countries may become pressure cookers (some already are - they will get worse) of unemployed and underemployed people. What happens when tons of would-be immigrants come to borders of Western countries, and those countries turn them away since they the only thing they would do with 90% of them is put them on welfare? Now THAT'S going to be the problem, not unemployment in some town in Austria.
An old steel mill might have had 1000 people per shift but I doubt it.
"In the long run we will lose most of the classic blue-collar workers, people doing the hot and dirty jobs in coking plants or around the blast furnaces. This will all be automated." This was the primary goal of "The Future," remember? Making life easier, and having the hardest, most dangerous jobs done by robots... Remember the various worker droids in Star Wars? Rosie the Robot Maid? The Stepford Wives? (Well, maybe not the Stepford Wives.)
We need to fight for those 14 jobs! We need companies like these! We should give them like 14 million dollars in tax breaks per year so we can have 14 jobs that pay 75K per year. Bring jobs back! Or we can do something reasonable and start planning on a very generous Universal Basic Income.
Only I can judge you.
Now where can I get myself some assembling machine threes...
The 14 people work in a plant that makes *steel wire*.
The steel itself is made in a plant next door.
The 14 people work in the wire mill, making wire from steel, not making steel. The article says there are 300 more workers doing support, and that may only be support of the wire mill, not the blast furnace that actually makes the iron and the converter that makes the steel from the iron.
How about forget anything that used to require massive labor
Let others wage war, you - habby Austria - marry!
The point is that previously a rolling mill to make 500,000 tonnes of steel wire a year would have required a lot more people to operate it and keep it running, maybe as many as a thousand people. Today it only takes a handful due to automation.
This is nothing really new, of course. In the 1970s in Britain the iron and steel industry was operating with old equipment with men shovelling oresands into open-hearth furnaces built in the 1920s while in places like Malaysia modern steel plants were being run by operators in airconditioned control rooms. In the end the old plants in Britain were shut down and 90% of the employees were laid off.
so long as those differences involve us getting cheap consumer goods.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
The Rich don't need you to buy their crap when they already own everything. Take a look at Apple, who became the most profitable company in human history by selling low volume, high margin items to the upper class (save for the occasional poor person trying to keep up with joneses).
Face it, the Rich don't need you or me. They'll claim ownership of everything and we'll give it to them because we can't bear the thought of somebody having food they didn't work all day for while we toil all day in the few jobs that are left. That's how it was for literately thousands of years of recorded history. What makes you think it won't go back to that?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Even the article says the plant takes ingot from the foundry NEXT DOOR
Add that to the equation and you will get a shit load more people working there
Incredibly misleading headline.
They are not making steel.
They are rolling steel already delivered in billet form into rod and wire.
The thing is called a "mini-mill" and I saw one running some time around 1989 with around twenty people total running the site.
LOL at their use of the word "people", when we all know it's MEN who make ALL of the steel in the world, not women...
Still, a nice try at pretending this isn't actually the case by using the word "people"...
Cool.
And how much more money do they make?
Listen, for most of human history, 99.9% of people lived a subsistence life. Why should now be any different?
" like in ancient Rome where the rich people who owned masses of slaves they used to bankrupt small businesses...."
??? History check? I call BS on this. What proof do you have that this was a widespread problem? Can some historian weigh in on this ? Seems you have some ideologized vision of Rome. Also contrary to popular belief horses were very rarely senators.
not HaPsburg!
Read the quote I posted. They don't count the people running the furnace. That's considered a separate facility.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
Anyone who doesn't hunt or gather is technologically unemployed. Inventions like agriculture, animal husbandry, sanitary sewers, paved roads, carpentry, cloth created new jobs that didn't exist for our paleolithic ancestors.
Over the millennia, the specific technologies that have thrown people out of work, generation after generation, have changed. But the process has not.
The big change in the last couple of centuries is that people live long enough to see their occupations go away, or change so dramatically they're far from the same thing, because they pace of change has picked up. Old age took care of those made redundant by the horse-collar. Dockworkers, not so much.
My dentist isn't doing the same things now as when he started, decades ago. (I for one am glad of it.)
And nobody unloads cargo ships by hand into boxcars, or boxcars into trucks. (And I'm glad of that, too.)
So, they're making steel the way Lays makes potato chips. This is a bad thing? I guess it is, if you're a professional slag wrangler or potato peeler, and you can't or won't learn how to do anything else that is more in demand.
There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.