carol: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." i'm carol massar. oliver: i'm oliver renick. carol: this week, the current state of the workforce and what it might look like five to 10 years from now. oliver: how job advancement looks a lot different in asia. carol: the real reason the gender wage gap persists. oliver: all that and more on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

carol: we're here with the editor-in-chief of "bloomberg businessweek." i love this issue. it is all about the jobs market. how did you guys approach it? megan: we wanted to pick jobs because it is so much the center of what we talked about on a political basis every day, but it is such a nuanced argument and i feel that a lot of bloomberg feels that so much of the nuance has been stripped away from this argument. we can all talk about bringing jobs back and manufacturing and automation and uber, and how jobs are going away, but we don't talk about the real fundamental issue paralyzing parts of our economy. how do we train the people for the jobs of tomorrow, not the jobs of today? where really are robots going to take over, and how are companies grappling with this in changing their workforce or not changing their workforce fast enough to deal with some of these changes? we really want to take an inside look at that from the ground up, whether that is trucking, training former guerrillas in warfare, or looking at one of the most persistent problems, which is the gender wage gap

that we see in the u.s. and other countries. oliver: i like the way you approach it from different angles of sometimes taking a very macro academic look at things and also using a very micro anecdotal way to show the real effect on people and small businesses. one of the real effects is looking at what's happening in asia, where you had a history of growth happening economically in these industries, now that are getting closer and closer to basically being replaced by robots. here, we moved on from some of these industries. asia still is a lot of the workforce. carol: and the emerging world. megan: absolutely. too often there's a misconception that asia is one block. there are highly developed countries and countries along the journey and still underdeveloped countries.

what this article really looks at in a graphic way is how countries that are at the developing end of that scale are actually are getting fundamentally disrupted in their progress to improving prosperity and their economies because some of the manual labor that was the traditional start for their workers to move up the chain, the prosperity chain, textile work, making clothes that we buy at places like target and walmart, those jobs are being automated. we talk about factorues in china. that is essentially a huge room of automated textile making. it hurts the ability of countries like malaysia and cambodia to seize on what has been the traditional prosperity grantor in moving up the ladder, moving towards china, korea, japan in terms of more developed industry. it's one of those disruptive forces in automation that you don't see talked about enough, of how exactly it is disrupting some of the least developed countries, not just the most developed. carol: if the cost of labor is no longer an issue, you can manufacture right at home. megan: exactly. and how quickly people have been able to scale up. in another article, they talk about a company in austria now producing 500,000 tons of steel

wire with 14 people. and how much it has become high skilled -- we are becoming increasingly a workforce where there's high skill and mid skill. it is the low skill that is going away. carol: the gender wage gap, it's depressing we are still talking about it, but we are. megan: we still make $.80 on the dollar. that is the number you always hear. we have age on him. oliver: seniority. megan: we want to go on that headline number and talk about some of the structural reasons that have prevented this from making any gains in this for decades now. it's not just that women leave the workforce to have children, it's not that they opt into lower paying jobs. the lack of transparency over the process and a lack of willingness to be transparent. we talk a lot about that, and some companies have been forced to smash the glass by saying -- salesforce is a perfect example. two women looked at everything, and salesforce adjusted overnight in a very rapid

process. added millions to their pay packets of people. to balance people out. very few companies are willing to do that or even give detailed information about the gaps that exist. we're talking about gaps between women who do lesser jobs, we are talking about gaps between women and men who do the same job. carol: apples to apples. oliver: you have a lot of anecdotes and company specific examples of the story, we have that analysis from claire suddath. claire: i was interested in the gender pay gap, but i was more interested in what companies and people are doing to try to tackle it and through their attempts, successful or not, i could see what was actually working and what wasn't. but first, we examined why is this happening? it is so pervasive across our whole economy. carol: still. claire: still. for many years. it's not really moving. it's been relatively constant at

about 80%, women make about 80% of what men make, and it's been that way for at least 20 years. carol: in the story, you make that distinction because you can take all the jobs that women work and all the jobs that men work and compare the pay, but you can also compare the exact jobs. that's a better comparison at this point. claire: it depends what you want to talk about and what you want change. when you hear the number 80% or $.80 on the dollar, what that means is that it is the big bird's eye view of the clustering where women tend to be in lower paying jobs, lower paying positions within the same companies. when you do the job-to-job comparisons, quite often women are still paid less. it's much smaller across the whole economy, about 5%. but that -- within some industries, it is smaller. and the job search company glassdoor has said of

programmers, all things being equal, education and experience, women make about 28% less than men. oliver: why does it continue to be so pernicious when there seems to be so may different efforts -- whether it's companies addressing it very publicly or directly -- even on the investment side, where more and more investors want to be involved in companies that they screen specifically to have resolved this problem, but it is still there? claire: i think that is a great question and it's one that companies are really dealing with. i talked to a number of companies that looked within themselves and found this job-to-job discrepancy. one of them was salesforce, and they bumped everyone up to where they thought they needed to be and then they did it again a year later. they added race to their analysis and they had to bump people up again. part of that is because last year, they acquired 14 companies and hired 17,000 people, so

people were coming into them with these wage gaps that followed them from job to job. it appears to be, when you look at the statistics, when women just out of college between the ages of 22 and 27, they do tend to make roughly what men make. 97%. and then as they advance in their careers, they're not getting the raises. and if they have children, that's when they are falling significantly behind, because they take time off. even if it's just a few months of maternity leave, there is this preconception that they aren't going to be as able to travel, they may not be able to handle the increased workload if they get promoted to executive or something like that. carol: as companies look into this issue, how is perception where bosses might look at a woman and say wait a minute, she's having kids and she won't be able to travel, making those decisions that ultimately play into the financial equation in terms of what they are paid? claire: that is the case. i was surprised. i talked to companies but also individual people, and some of them went on the record and some

didn't. there were women who were privy to these conversations about, do we really want to hire her? she just had a kid or she's going to have a kid. do we really want to do this? even if they do make a decision to hire that woman, they thought about it and maybe when they are going through negotiations, they treat her differently. that's an individual basis. but it seems to happen quite often. oliver: up next, where to find hundreds of empty jobs. here's a hint, the address, 1600 pennsylvania avenue. carol: how a move intended to protect american workers may now force some american businesses to close. oliver: this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

♪ carol: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i'm carol massar. oliver: i'm oliver renick. you can also find us online. carol: and on the bloomberg businessweek mobile app. oliver: in the politics section, the white house is struggling to appointeeical positions. carol: we talked to a reporter about why these jobs remain unfilled. >> when you look at senate confirmed positions, top positions within the white house, president trump has only filled about 10% of more than 500 jobs. there are hundreds of openings within the white house, within the executive branch, all across federal agencies. we are talking deputy

secretaries, assistant secretaries at the cabinet level. you have all the cabinet secretaries in place, but they do not have the top staff to help them fulfill the president's agenda. it's become almost a crisis level of the white house with several positions open. carol: to be fair, give me some context. is this typically how long it takes for a new administration? i do understand that some of it takes a while to get things in order, or is the trump administration really behind? >> the trump administration is takes a while to get things in behind previous administrations. they have about 45 positions that have been filled compared to about 170 for the obama administration, 130 for the bush administration. part of this is a long process for senate confirmation and going through the process of getting your fbi background checks and ethics forms cleared. it is becoming much more slow than previous administrations and it's become something that even republicans have become frustrated by, the trump administration is so slow to get these jobs filled. carol: are democrats slowing down the process?

democrats did slow it down at the start. republicans in the white house said it led to a ripple effect. we didn't have the cabinet secretary someplace, you can't start hiring their deputies and support staff. some democrats said they wanted to have a resistance to the trump administration. and they did put in some delays during the early part of the administration. now, it seems to be more the trump administration not getting names across and knocking people in front of the senate to get confirmed. carol: why is it taking so long for the trump administration to kind of fill these vacancies? >> there are a number of different reasons. everything from the long process of getting fbi background checks and ethics forms, to people not wanting to work for the trump administration because of either the russia scandal or the fact that the boss often undermines

his top secretaries and top people within the agencies with his twitter account or his statements and interviews. there are a number of reasons that people are hesitant to work for the administration or is taking them longer to get confirmed. carol: i also found it fascinating that you talk about what's tricky, in terms of people who might work for president trump and his team, is that he's demanding loyalty. i mean, he really is demanding loyalty from his appointees. >> that's true. there is sort of a black list for people who spoke out against trump during the campaign, and republicans who signed petitions against trump are not to be welcomed within any of the agencies. so there are people who were hired and fired once the white house realized they had spoken out against trump or written negative articles about trump during the campaign. so there is this high focus on loyalty, which may make it difficult for the trump administration to find people who were completely loyal throughout the campaign, who supported him from the beginning and who never spoke out against him. that's one of the reasons they are having trouble filling all these jobs. carol: staying in the politics section, the u.s. congress failed to extend the key part of the h-2b visa program. oliver: that is costing american jobs.

>> we used a story about a bed-and-breakfast in maine, the oldest business continually open in this part of maine, right on the coast. traditionally, they have basically made all their money in the summer. they have a nice inn with a restaurant, right on the water. they rely, like a lot of programs in the hospitality industry, on a visa program called the h-2b visa program, which brings in seasonal workers and foreign workers to do low-skilled jobs. that program was not extended by congress in december. the amount of visas that are available have been cut in half and businesses all over the country are suddenly stuck with no access to labor. they can't open up the restaurant. is a really serious problem for them and other businesses.

congress has not extended this visa program under the auspices that it takes jobs from american workers, but the opposite is actually seeming to be true, in that it is hurting american businesses rather than helping them. carol: give us some history about the h-2b visa program. we talk so much about the h-1b visa program in terms of the impact on the technology sector. talk about the history of this program and how important it has been to so many of these industries. it's been going on for years. >> for decades. it basically brings foreign, low-skilled workers over to the united states for a temporary period of time to work jobs that basically no americans are going to want to do. it's low-skilled and probably low wage. this is working in restaurants, working in hotels, doing room service and cleaning and things like that, waiting tables, being servers. and we have cut the number of these visas that are available in half over the past few

months. it's a real strain for businesses, not just in the hospitality industry, but in the meat processing industry, in the fishing industry up in alaska, especially sparsely populated areas in the country where there is no local labor force to grab from. oliver: up next, the uptake in deportation that make some american farmers feel nervous. carol: and why today's low u.s. unemployment rates show we are a long way away from a post-work world. oliver: this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

♪ oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i'm oliver renick. carol: i'm carol massar. you can also listen to us on the radio on sirius xm. and 1130 new york, 91 fm washington d.c. oliver: in london and asia on the bloomberg radio plus app. carol: opening the magazine this week, peter coy argues it's too soon to worry about a robot taking your job. peter: right now, automation is on everybody's mind. we see all the time with driverless cars and voice recognition, not just recognizing your voice but understanding what you are trying to say. your words can be translated into any language in the world. and people think, what is the role for people at that stage? are all the jobs going away? there are those who talk about how there is going to be a useless class. carol: depressing. peter: especially if we are in the useless class. oliver: maybe we already are and

we don't know it. how do we separate the dialogue and speculation and drama from the numbers and the data? peter: that's the thing. the world in which people are useless appendages right now is science fiction. if you look at the numbers -- japan has unemployment rate under 3%. it's one of the most robotized society in the world. what people are missing is that they have the robots because they have so few workers. it's not that they don't have workers because they have robots. oliver: the demographic problem came first. peter: exactly. employers are crying out for workers. it's not as situation where workers are being displaced by automation. carol: we have gone through revolutions before, the industrial revolution where we thought, oh my god, factories are going to take away workers. no, it freed workers from doing mundane and dangerous tasks. can we look at the cycle of technology in the same way?

peter: my conclusion is yes. the argument for no is this time is different. as long as machines were replacing our biceps and triceps, it was one thing, but now they are replacing our brains, and that's the last thing we have going for us, until this time really is different. the argument i would make is in a lot of cases, the technology can supplement or complement the human being and other tools, just the same way that influence for starting fires or a hammer or a car complements the strength of human being. i think artificial intelligence and different types of automation can do the same thing. oliver: in the economic section, some farmers in kansas are beginning to worry as more deportations are sweeping across the u.s. michelle: it's a hard number to

pin down, can the share of undocumented immigrants in the industry around 50% or higher and in parts of the industry, in dairy and farmhands. it's very high. they are incredibly reliant on foreign labor and the people who are here are a huge part of these industries and these farms in these small businesses and bigger businesses and bigger farms. oliver: what is happening to those undocumented folks that are working and are now trying to navigate a very different administration than the one they were used to? michelle: there's a lot of fear and uncertainty. a lot of them in southwest kansas just don't know. they're going to people like immigration lawyers and asking questions about what can they do to protect against being deported, even just for having overstayed their visas. the trump administration has said they will prioritize those

who have had criminal offenses, but the fear is if they get pulled over for a traffic ticket and are seen to be undocumented, then they are open for deportation. there's an incredible amount of fear, and some people are trying to take faster precautions in terms of getting more documentation or trying to fast-track their visa renewal process and that sort of thing. it's an incredible onerous process with a lot of uncertainties and a lot of fears. it's hard to navigate, even for those with the best of intentions. carol: it makes the farmers in the united states nervous, they are already dealing with a tight agricultural workforce. michelle: absolutely. we have a national unemployment rate of 4.3%, and yet in some parts of kansas, it's almost half that. 2.3%, 2.5%, 2.7%. some people will look at it and say that's great, there are not that many people who are unemployed. but it really is a sign that there aren't enough workers. that area of the country and certainly that industry is dealing with a tighter labor market than even at the national

level, which is already tight. they are really trying to hold on to these workers in every way possible and be certain that they can still have a flow of workers coming in to replace those lost for other reasons, or to expand their businesses. that's not a certain thing at all right now. oliver: what can business owners and managers on the ground have vocal and different experience with what happening than say someone in d.c. who is viewing this on a nationwide scale? what can somebody like the people in your story do to make sure that they have workers that are still doing the jobs they need? michelle: that's a good question. one thing that they preach even in very red states like kansas is this isn't about politics, it's about economics and it's about being a good business owner, being a good manager to your workers. especially in that area and across the industry, they are very tight communities of

workers that are really protective of their employees and they want to make sure that -- they say these employees have come here, they might be overstaying a visa, but they are good, honest workers that filed the paperwork and pay their taxes and contribute to the community. in the manager's eyes, they want to keep these workers and be able to advocate for them, and hopefully at some point, get some some sort of path to legalization that they can get those workers safe and protected from any sort of deportation or threat of deportation. oliver: up next, why target should be very worried about amazon's takeover of whole foods. carol: plus, the technology that may put a nation of truckers out of work. oliver: this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

♪ oliver: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i'm oliver renick. carol: i'm carol massar. still ahead, what it means when your resume says "former guerrilla combatant." oliver: the truckers working alongside coders to try to replace truckers' jobs. carol: and the undiscovered frank lloyd wright. all that ahead on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪ oliver: we're back with "bloomberg businessweek" editor-in-chief megan murphy, to talk about more must reads in

the magazine with a focus on jobs. a great story on target, a very company-specific adjustment going to have to be made here. tell us how you responded to the news about amazon and whole foods, and what it means for this other retailer? megan: responding to the news is a good way to put it. when news events happen, we have to think about what's added value and obviously this mammoth, disruptive purchase by whole foods by amazon for $14 billion is going to have knock on effect. you saw it immediately in the prices for the retailers. we wanted to focus on target and how their foray into the grocery market has been really challenging for them. it had a magic about its brand, it was on trend and attracted youth, and it was a cultivated upmarket brand at a down market price. now with amazon taking on whole foods, it's a really big threat to them, and we'll see how much

cross-sells to with whole when and in other products he takes over so many stores that he has in that physical retail space. carol: tough time for target with this huge transformation spending billions of dollars. the timing is not great. megan: it's not good for any retailer. that business is so cutthroat to begin with. the issue is we are moving more dollars online and many more on things that we see. we still want to see vegetables and fruit, and jeff bezos has proven he takes industries he thinks he can make cheaper, more efficient, and he exploits your laziness. trust me, when he takes over whole foods, we will see how much further he can expand amazon and its brand into your daily life, including what food you eat. carol: definitely exploiting my laziness. the job issue, we love the story. columbia negotiated a peace treaty, but you've got thousands of ex-guerrillas trying to go back to work.

megan: so at the end of this 52 year conflict, you have these people, this has been who we want to talk to -- your job is your identity, more so than almost anything beside your family. how do you go from your entire identity being a guerrilla operator, your entire knowledge was this group that clothed you, fed you, how do you transition that into the workforce? in an environment where jobs are not that plentiful, the economy has its ups and downs and is very volatile. what training assistance is available for you and the safety net that you go into when you just try and join the workforce, when your resume says former guerrilla? oliver: how easy was that to find these folks? megan: i think after the conflict ended, there were a lot of people wanted to get out and talk and be visible. being this invisible element in

society in a conflict that was so bloody for so long, is a real credit to those institutions down there that are educating and training in the businesses that are making the best and taking the risk of bringing these people on board. we hope it's a hopeful story. oliver: shifting gears back to the u.s. carol: literally. oliver: one of the heartland industries of the u.s. is up for major shakeups in technology, that's trucking. megan: the number one job in 26 states. the headlines you always hear. trucking. a lot has been written about the automation of the trucking industry. but not a lot has been written about a company that works on both ends of the spectrum. it hires the highest priced coders out of silicon valley to code automated trucking, one of the most lucrative elements of the job sector in the world, and at the other end, it also hires some of the most disadvantaged, impoverished, most backbreaking labor out there, and that is trucking. it combines them. it automates trucks, but it still employs truckers to drive them in neighborhoods and areas

of the country where automation doesn't work right. it's the middle road in the near future of automation. it's a fascinating story of a clash of cultures. also we like to think hopeful in that we need to move people from the jobs they are doing into mid-skill and higher-skill jobs, and this is going to be one of the ways to do it. carol: we got more from reporter max chapman, who hit the road with the coders and truckers of starsky robotics. max: basically, the idea that advances in artificial intelligence with google, self driving cars, the computer that was able to beat the world's best go player, taking people jobs. the most obvious places that could happen is in truck driving, which is a huge piece of the american labor force and global labor force and also big industry. carol: how huge? i was shocked to learn how many

people are out there as truckers. max: 3.5 million truckers, depending on how you do the math. some people have come up with calculations that show it is the most common job in the united states. i think it's probably one of the most common jobs, there are a lot of retail workers, but it's a huge number when you add in the people who work in the industry, people who work in truck manufacturers, truck stops, gas stations, that's another 4 million people. it is a big part of the economy that a lot of people, if you live on the coasts or an information driven field, you probably just don't appreciate it at all. oliver: it's a whole infrastructure that exists. think it's a really good point, a lot of people on the coasts have not been familiar with this, but anyone who has driven back and forth across the u.s., you see truck drivers, you see truck stops, it's a whole community. what do they have think about in terms of what is changing the rules?

max: truck driving, compared to self driving cars, is a much better venue for artificial intelligence. trucks mostly drive on highways. highways have clear lane markings with no pedestrians, very few animals, not a whole lot the computer would have to worry about beyond following lane lines and maintaining a set speed. trucks are big and heavy and expensive and easier to outfit with these sensors. the other thing that's going on is the trucking industry can't find enough drivers. there's a shortage, industry based about 50,000 jobs that are unfilled and they think that number is going to triple over the next decade. you sort of have this collision of labor need and also a technology opportunity. now, there are some questions about how good this is going to be for workers.

while trucking is a job that not a lot of people want, it is for some people the only job they can possibly get. carol: speaking of collisions, you talk about one company in particular, starsky robotics. there you have a combination of truck drivers and coders working together on these self driving trucks. max: it's a startup based in silicon valley. i got interested in them because basically they were very thoughtful about the collision between silicon valley and what you might think of as the middle of the country or blue-collar workers. the ceo was talking about how when he hires a truck driver, he has to give them a little warning about what it's like to work with engineers. these people are from san francisco and i've got to warn you, they buy expensive jeans and they've had opportunities that are out of this world and by contrast, when he hires an engineer, he has to give them a similar thing, you are working with a different part of the workforce, a part of the workforce that isn't negotiating different six-figure jobs for

giant tech companies. carol: many of them voted president trump. max: many of whom voted for president trump, yeah. truck driving is much bigger in trump country than it is in blue states. carol: up next, reno is turned a little more like silicon valley and a little less like reno. oliver: just how much is your job at risk? we will show you what the data says. carol: this is "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

♪ oliver: welcome to "bloomberg businessweek." i'm oliver renick. carol: i'm carol massar. you can find us online at bloomberg.com. oliver: and download our app from the app store. carol: in the technology section, tesla's new giga factory is having a profound impact on its hometown. oliver: that is reno, nevada. here is reporter karen wise. karen: reno, nevada is in the

middle of a huge boom, as it's been building up a lot of new workforce type of projects since the downturn. since the financial downturn. it was a huge foreclosure capital, it was huge -- it had huge unemployment, almost 14% unemployment at the bottom of the market and they started recruiting all of these various new job providers, a lot of high-tech manufacturing and the biggest one is tesla, which opened the giga factory there to build batteries for the electric cars and the other power sources systems that they have. all of a sudden in downtown reno, a place that was pretty strung out, it was kind of fading, the poor man's vegas, now you have pour-over coffee shops and little food halls with different vendors. i had delicious bourbon chocolate truffles. it is a city that has a lot of energy.

unemployment is below 4%, it's an incredibly tight labor market and people are moving from out-of-state, and the region is really trying to up the skill set of their existing workforce to try to be prepared for these kind of new jobs of the future. oliver: all this sounds wonderful, but i'm curious how this sort of came about. obviously, reno is a beautiful place and a wonderful place you want to go to start, but maybe not so much. there's a different incentive. what was it about reno that made it amenable to the companies? karen: there are a bunch of things going on. back in 2011, at the bottom of the market when unemployment was so high and foreclosures were so bad, the governor signed a bill to diversify the state economy and put money behind that. it came in the form of tax incentives. $1.3 billion in various tax breaks that tesla got. it said it would create 6500 direct jobs at the factory, plus the knock on effect of all the suppliers and restaurants in all their employees eating out and

all that. the location of reno is very good out west, it's kind of smack dab in the center of the western u.s. there are a lot of distribution centers for amazon, zulily, and part of that is because you can get pretty much anywhere in the west within one day of ground shipping. that's been a big boon for them as well, and they also have a lot of data center business there as well. apple, google just bought some land, switch just bought a big data center. part of that has to do with the climate. it's a desert, but it's high desert and it's really dry. it's not as hard to cool down. oliver: "bloomberg businessweek" created a fantastic graphic that shows you how worried you should be about getting replaced in your job. carol: we talked about with the brains behind that great story. >> we want to start by showing

people what jobs have been lost so far and what the status is. it shows you back to 1991 where the jobs have been lost in the largest quantities. a lot of its in manufacturing and there is a lot of housing during the bust in 2006, 2007. we kind of show you what you should be worried about. carol: you guys use colors and you use boxes. the big boxes show the labor market sectors that have been really hit hard. oliver: i love the design. the theme of this issue is very much about the job market, where jobs are going, where automation fits into that, and some of the answers i think are put very plainly here. how did you decide to -- it is a different aesthetically kind of approach. how did you decide to do it based on the size of the square, the tile, to break it up by the date? it's an interesting arrangement.

>> our graphics department came up with this treatment for the data, and we had a lot of discussions about how best to do it. it could be a simple bar chart, but we wanted to see something more engaging. this kind of invites you to look in and see what the biggest industries that are losing. we use the color to give you these overall sectors. the green for instance is manufacturing. you can see a lot of green in these first 10 years or so. oliver: from 1991 to early 2000, it's manufacturing jobs. carol: it a lot of green. >> year to date, a lot of the biggest ones are in retail. those are in red. oliver: you can see the story by the economic cycle of where you have manufacturing jobs disappearing from the 1990's to the 2000's and then during the crisis, construction jobs, all

the yellow on the table as homes stopped getting built. all this stuff. now, what jumped out to me was a big chunk for mining. carol: i highlighted this in the notes. the mining jobs specifically. it was heard a lot from president trump on the campaign trail and now as president, he's talking about bringing these jobs back. but that is an area that's been decimated. >> the biggest block is definitely in mining. oliver: when you are looking at this, there are two different ideas, jobs that have been lost and then the jobs that potentially could be lost. tell us about how you leverage that data to figure out what belongs in each part and how to view the future. >> the data for the second piece -- carol: that's a chart plot. >> yes, so that shows you -- carol: for those of us who listen to bloomberg or watch bloomberg, we talk about the dot plot with the federal reserve so much, to get an idea with the numbers of what the fed thinks in terms of where interest rates are going. it reminded me of the fed dot plot, but you do it with the job

representation to get an idea of which jobs are most secure in which are least secure. >> you see on the left side, which shows the jobs that are least likely to be replaced by robots, which is a lot of things like teachers and physicians. carol: you said medical school, so keep going. >> the health industry is going to be fine. on the other hand, you are seeing a lot of these in retail, a lot of the stuff that doesn't require formal education is also in the lower right corner. it's the most at risk. oliver: up next, how the gig economy isn't so flexible at all. carol: and why frank lloyd wright may not be do you think he is. we will explain. that's next on "bloomberg businessweek." ♪

♪ carol: welcome back to "bloomberg businessweek." i'm carol massar. oliver: i'm oliver renick. you can also catch us on the radio, 9091 fm in washington, d.c. am 960 in the bay area. carol: and in london and asia on the bloomberg radio app. oliver: it is common knowledge that u.s. workers commonly swap jobs. carol: the data tells a different story. here is reporter justin fox. justin: there's a perception less securee a lot be, that used to people switch jobs more often and a lot. looking at the economic data, and there's been a lot of research about this coming out from economists in the last couple of years, it seems like the opposite has been going on, especially for the past 15 years or so. median job tenure has been

rising higher than it was any time in the 1980's or 1990's. people are switching jobs less frequently. people move less frequently. and so on. carol: not to be a contrarian here, but maybe we are not measuring the data accurately. can that be an argument? is that fair? justin: part of it when you look at the job tenure, the question the bureau of labor statistics asks is how many years -- they ask people with wage and salary jobs how years have you been with your current employer. that is 4.2 years as the overall median, higher than it used to be. was ale lower than it couple years ago. it hasdle-aged men, actually declined since the 1980's or 1990's. what changed is women are

staying in the labor force longer and especially women after having children are much more likely to stay in their jobs than was the case in the 1970's or 1980's or early 1990's. oliver: it seems like there's a lot of different inputs here to the overall number and hard to figure out which one is contributing what. justin: that's definitely true. with any of these things, you dig deeper into the data and it gets more confusing. still, there does seem to be something real going on, especially since about 2000, where people who have jobs are sticking with them and that's not necessarily all positive. i mean partly, maybe people are sticking with their jobs because they are afraid of what will happen if they try switching, or there aren't any attractive jobs to switch to. carol: you also mentioned that maybe because there are less startups, that may be contributing also to what's going on. justin: right. start up rates have declined, despite all of the talk about disruption. on a nationwide, economy wide scale, there are fewer startups. more and more industries are getting more and more consolidated. clearly, new companies and growing companies often are the

ones doing a lot of the hiring, and when there's less of that, there's less reason to be switching jobs. carol: recent changes at frank lloyd wright's namesake foundation and school are putting a twist on the legendary architect's legacy. oliver: we talked with amber -- editor emma rosenbloom. amber: this year he would have turned 150 years old, there are a number of celebrations and the biggest one is that moma, the museum of modern art in new york. they have a huge new exhibit about his life and his works, and it's a very important new look at his life. oliver: there is an interesting story behind how all this stuff got to the museum. for a while, it faded into the background in the basement of a frank lloyd wright memorial somewhere. emma: the frank lloyd wright

foundation in arizon has had very tight controls over his archives since his death. that is a long time that they've been keeping them derelict in a basement, mostly because his widow wanted to have that control. but in doing so, the study and the amount of stuff that people can know about him has languished. and in 2012, with new thinking at the head of the foundation, they released the archives to moma and since then, moma has been planning this big celebration an event based on his 150th birthday. what they've done is they've gone through all the archives, which has a lot of stuff that you wouldn't think. they have given scholars each a room at moma to illuminate frank lloyd wright cinematically. -- thematically. there's stuff in there who -- even people who think they know frank lloyd wright and his iconic buildings like the guggenheim don't know about him. that's why the exhibit is getting so much great press.

we are really uncovering these sides of him you wouldn't know otherwise. carol: it is things like ecosystems and farming and education for black children in the rural south, who knew? right? emma: nobody would have known this without this exhibit and the archives being released. also, there are interesting things in the development of cities. frank lloyd wright famously said he didn't like cities and new york was a testament to greed, but there are a number of city models in the exhibit. oliver: it's interesting to see inside the mind of someone whose work we are familiar with and think about this stuff beyond the buildings and architecture, the societal impact of art and really how they are bringing in a lot of different directions. emma: as you said, particularly the societal aspect. he really nailed what american architecture was, and what modernism in america was.

as opposed to in europe, which was kind of these big white boxes, he did the prairie house in america, and that has become the iconic symbol of american modernist architecture. in the exhibit, there is tons of stuff related to look at and people will really learn a lot about them and they thought they knew a lot about. carol: "bloomberg businessweek" is available online right now. oliver: a lot about jobs in this issue. carol: i liked that graphical representation of what has happened to jobs and what may happen to jobs in terms of automation. go to bloomberg.com and you can play around with the data sets. oliver: i like the very in-depth looks at the gender wage gap, addressing an important topic in the most exhaustive way we've seen in some time. i also really like the narrative about the coders working with the truckers or learning to work with each other in different backgrounds and what it means for jobs and automation. it's a big industry that i think a lot of people have forgotten

about. carol: i just want to be a fly in the cab to hear those discussions between the truckers on the coders. oliver: you know it is interesting. more bloomberg television starts right now. ♪

♪ emily: i am emily chang, and this is the best of "bloomberg technology," where we bring the top interviews from the week in tech. coming up, mutiny in the world's most viable startup. why investors decided it was time for travis kalanick to go and a way forward for uber. plus, sheryl sandberg opens up in a bloomberg exclusive interview. the facebook ceo gives her take on big branding, the future of digital ads, and cybersecurity. and the inside track on the trump administration's plans for

tech