I worked in local government – show me a robot that could do my job better

https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2016/oct/29/local-government-robot-job-automation

Version 0 of 1.

I started my career in local government and I loved it – so I was shocked by the idea that the job I was so passionate about could be done by a robot.

You might trust a robot to vacuum your house while you’re out, but would you trust one to pick up early signs of mental health problems, or to have a conversation with an elderly person who hasn’t spoken to anyone else that day?

The recent Deloitte state of the state report has suggested that 77% of the 1.3m “repetitive and predictable administrative roles” in the public sector could be entirely automated by 2030. I find that patronising and unrealistic. The report doesn’t define what a “repetitive and predictable” role is.

I worked in local government and can assure the authors that data entry, en masse, has been automated for years. When residents call a customer service centre, they are triaged by an automated system and that’s just one example. Automation has already happened to the extent to which local government and the ageing infrastructure it has can provide it.

If repetitive and predictable refers to administrative jobs, I challenge any computer or algorithm to organise meetings between multiple members of staff with conflicting diaries that may not be up-to-date, and find a suitable room to hold the meeting in. Some jobs in the public sector may seem like they could be done by a robot but are in fact heavily reliant on the personal touch. In local government I came across PAs who knew the names, faces and number of children of every person with whom their chief exec had a meeting.

And while most administrative tasks such as filling in forms are now done online, frontline housing staff who help residents to fill out forms do so because they often deal with vulnerable people who need sensitivity. Show me a robot who can do that with genuine warmth and compassion.

There are jobs that I encountered which could, in theory, be automated. Some housing surveys, now done via face-to-face meetings, could be done more efficiently by sending out an online survey. However, for many elderly residents these surveys gave them a chance to have a chat and feel part of a community. The staff conducting the surveys remembered personal things about residents, which made people feel their responses meant something, and you can gather information you might not get via an online survey.

The Deloitte report argues that automating great swaths of the public sector will lead to significant savings. But the public sector, especially local government, is a huge employer. The sector pays tax and boosts the economy. I can’t feasibly think that all these people would or could go on to work in IT if their jobs were automated.

Moreover, in local government people don’t only do one thing. Everyone, including PAs and housing officers, take on varied roles. They’ve had to, because of the cuts. You might automate one part of their job, but there’s a whole lot more they do which can’t be automated. So for now, we might be wise sticking to robot vacuum cleaners.

This series aims to give a voice to the staff behind the public services that are hit by mounting cuts and rising demand, and so often denigrated by the press, politicians and public. If you would like to write an article for the series, contact kirstie.brewer@theguardian.com

Talk to us on Twitter via @Guardianpublic and sign up for your free weekly Guardian Public Leaders newsletter with news and analysis sent direct to you every Thursday.