﷽
..

🌱 what does the future of work look like for those currently left behind?

The covid-19 pandemic has spurred images of a flexible future of work. What does San Francisco or Tokyo or downtown London look like when white-collar workers can move elsewhere without losing their jobs? What does a small town with few local employers look like when distant companies begin hiring more remote workers?

How the Venice Biennale Makes Life Harder for Working Venetians offers a local perspective on this. Writing from Venice, Giulio Piovesan states that the local population is not high enough to sustain the diverse plethora of jobs they need. Instead the economy is highly dependent on tourism, a seasonal industry, leaving locals with no way to make a dependable, stable living. And often no way to make a living in their field of study. Piovesan points to chemistry PhDs taking on art gallery guard jobs and states:

There is no easy way out of this situation. It would take decades to tilt the financial axis of the city away from mass tourism, to weave a social fabric whose workforce can be employed in a variety of fields that are not dependent upon foreigners. Unfortunately, for the time being it does not look likely that such a change is going to happen, so a lousy job at the Biennale is the best one can hope for.

How would a remote-work-friendly impact Piovesan’s Venice? Let’s consider…

Potential Positives

1. Diversify the Economy If Venice is full of college-educated individuals looking for interesting, stable work, then that’s an untapped employee pool for remote-friendly companies. If the job market for remote workers opens up, that may help expand Venice’s economy beyond tourism and provide a more sustainable living for locals.

2. Stabilize the Tourism Industry As a tourist town, Venice sparkles to distant eyes. Employees at remote-friendly firms outside of Italy may jump at the opportunity to either live in Venice or vacation there in the off-season. This may result in a less-seasonal, more consistent tourism industry, and therefore more stable jobs.

3. Higher Standard of Living A small increase in highly-paid, less seasonal visitors and residents can boost the quality of living for all. Wealthy parents sending their kids to local schools will have the resources to push for a better education for their kids, which may improve the quality of education for all. A working paper out of Philadelphia explores the pros and cons of gentrification in more detail.

Potential Negatives

1. Employment Opportunities Stay Static As remote work opens up the labor pool, global competition increases. The chemistry PhD in Venice who’s spent the last 5 years working at the Biennale is in competition with the chemistry PhD in Amsterdam currently employed in a research lab. Instead of a more open economy for all, Venice may instead see an influx of skilled, highly paid workers with few opportunities for their own.

2. Gentrification Leaves Locals Behind While we’ve discussed the potential benefits of gentrification, there are severe downsides. A wealthy parent might advocate for change within the education system. A group of wealthy parents might start a private school, segregate themselves from the local community, and advocate for fewer shared resources.

3. Widening Inequality As discussed in point one, the opportunities of remote work are most afforded to folks currently employed. They have the skills (and now the flexibility) to move to employment deserts. But the people already at those employment deserts don’t necessarily have all the skills right away. If the education system can’t prepare residents for the new opportunities, inequality could widen. Rich, educated workers from abroad, as well as wealthy locals, take advantage of the new opportunities, while even fewer of said jobs make it to the average Venetian local.

Will remote work be good or bad for Venice?

It’s worth noting here that I have no special knowledge of Venice. Everything I’m about to say is a thought exercise based solely on Piovesan’s article.

Which do I think is more likely for Venice? Will it see more of the positive outcomes or the negative outcomes? Of course, every change comes with both, and the costs of change are often paid most heavily by those with the least resources. But in Venice’s case, using purely the information from Piovesan’s piece, I feel relatively optimistic. Piovesan points predominantly to a highly educated workforce with no local employers, which makes it more likely that remote work will broaden opportunities for Venetians. Pair that with a slight increase or stabilization in the number of visitors Venice receives per month, and employment prospects for locals could get better.

That said, I think the biggest risk will be the rate of relocation. As a well-known tourist attraction, Venice will be a prime destination for remote workers around the globe. Who doesn’t want to live in Venice for three months? If the influx of wealthy long-term visitors and new residents happens too quickly and for too long, locals may find themselves on the wrong side of gentrification.

That said, for the workers Piovesan describes in his piece, I suspect that “a lousy job at the Biennale” will no longer be the best they can hope for.

Inspired by: How the Venice Biennale Makes Life Harder for Working Venetians

Related to:

Don't want to do that? @ me on twitter or mastodon

Every post on this blog is a work in progress. Phrasing may be less than ideal, ideas may not yet be fully thought through. Thank you for watching me grow.