Slashdot Mirror


In Banking, 70% of Front-Office Jobs Will Be Dislocated By AI (americanbanker.com)

An anonymous reader shares a report: Some bankers and observers have suggested that only the boring parts of jobs, drudgery like data entry and filling out forms, will disappear so the humans will be able to focus on more interesting tasks, and that no actual jobs will be lost. Bank employees themselves seem to think this. In an Accenture survey released last week of 1,300 nonexecutive bank employees, 67% said they believe AI will improve their work-life balance, and 57% expect it will expand their career prospects.

But Autonomous Research also issued a report last week that estimated that in the U.S. alone, 2.5 million financial services employees will be "exposed" to AI technologies in the front, middle and back office -- 1.2 million working in banking and lending, 460,000 in investment management, and 865,000 in insurance. "These functions will see 20-40% productivity gains, or unemployment, depending on your vantage point," the report stated. About $1 trillion in costs will be exposed to AI transformation in financial services sectors by 2030, according to the report; $450 million of this would in banking. In banking, 70% of front-office jobs will be dislocated by AI, the researchers say: 485,000 tellers, 219,000 customer service representatives, and 174,000 loan interviewers and clerks. They will be replaced by chatbots, voice assistants and automated authentication and biometric technology.

And 96,000 financial managers and 13,000 compliance officers will be laid off as AI-based anti-money-laundering, anti-fraud, compliance and monitoring software fills in. Another 250,000 loan officers will lose their jobs to AI-based credit underwriting and smart contracts technology.

6 of 138 comments (clear)

  1. No problem by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    No problem so long as we can repeatedly press "star", "pound", or "0" until we're connected to a human.

  2. We should be sunk in unemployment by DalM · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The end of slavery was going to take all the jobs. Then it was going to be industrialization that was going to take all the jobs. Then it was going to be immigrants. Than automation. Then globalization. Now it's immigrants again that are taking all the jobs.

    Yet, after all that, we still have jobs in this nation.

    Something tells me that even with the future of AI people will still find things to do.

    1. Re:We should be sunk in unemployment by Tablizer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Time for a different fad bubble, AI getting tiresome. Think!

      IOT buttplugs
      Moon orbit vacations
      Self-flying cars
      Segway roller-skates
      Dog control brain implants
      Trump wigs with hidden sensors & telemetry
      Wooden underwear
      Self diagnosis webcam pills
      Poop analysis Tricorder
      Hello Kitty porn
      Methane-flavored gum
      Battle-bots with AR-15's
      3D goat-se stickers
      Plaid trash-cans
      Plain kilts
      Transparent kilts
      Transparent wooden underwear
      Blue orange juice
      MS Bob rebirth
      MS Bob + Clippy porn
      MS Bob + Hello Kitty porn
      Linux toothbrushes (with Emacs, of course)
      A Beowulf cluster of Linux toothbrushes
      Linux kilts

    2. Re:We should be sunk in unemployment by seven+of+five · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yes. Take a good look at that glorious 3.9 percent rate. This number is touted despite the 63% participation rate (if you've given up finding a regular job, you're not counted.) Also, if you have a PhD and your job is picking dildos in an Amazon warehouse, that counts as 100% full time employment.

      Although the 3.9 percent rate ain't bad, it conceals a LOT of dry rot. Capitalism via AI is going to massacre the middle class.

  3. Re:Its not really a problem by superposed · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You do know that immigrants create jobs as well as occupying them, right?

    Also, who will retrain the employees and enforce shorter workweeks without some kind of communist/socialist intervention? Most companies I know don't want to spend money on retraining, and want employees to work as many hours as possible, presumably so they don't have to pay benefits to additional employees. They may also resent paying a living wage for 30 hours of work instead of 50. So they might need some strong-arming to go along with your plan.

  4. You won't have a choice by rsilvergun · · Score: 5, Insightful

    we're giving more and more money to a smaller and smaller group of people. Rather than "trickle down" they're using that money to buy out their competitors. They've got so much of it they can and will pay 2-3x what any sane person would. Then they can make their money back because they have a virtual monopoly. Years of weak anti-trust enforcement in the name of ending "job-killing regulations" lets them do it.

    The people who are setting you up have been hard at work on it since Regan was in the Whitehouse. Obama was a minor bump in the road (very minor, he's still a Corporate Democrat) but they've bought out pretty much everything now. That last tax cut was overwhelmingly unpopular. A Tax Cut. Unpopular. Let that sink in. And It _still_ passed. The ruling class were going around saying if it didn't they'd cut the politicians off. We've got open bribery and nobody seems to care. Seriously, at this point I don't think you or me stand a chance...

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/