When operations are overhauled at a manufacturing plant or storage warehouse, or a company begins to deploy new types of technology or equipment, jobs are almost always lost. The aim itself could be to reduce employees costs—or it may be to improve quality, speed or to align with other companies in the supply chain. If the goal is upgrading and strengthening, will the existing workforce be effective at keeping up with the pace of change — or will some workers ought to be replaced by individuals with better skills? Even in the case of significant workforce reductions, does that indicate the full workforce has to go? Or can some workers be retrained to be valuable contributors in the newly re-configured operation or other parts of the organization?
 
For any reason, it’s better to keep some employees. With a recent warning from the Deloitte Institute that 2.4 million manufacturing jobs may go unfilled between now and 2028 because of the nation’s skills gap — plus an extra 2.69 million jobs to be vacated by retirees and another 1.96 million openings due to industry growth — companies have to invest more resources into constant training for their existing employees, instead of trying to swap them from an already scarce pool of talent.
 
Robotics may reduce the need for assembly line workers, but the manufacturing process still needs people to maintain and troubleshoot that equipment and inspect the products for quality assurance. Workers on the assembly line, whose previous duties included reading technical drawings and instructions and calibrating machinery, can now be prepared for other relevant job duties such as for instance those performed by instrument technicians/machine operators, CAD draftsmen, CNC operators, and quality control inspectors.
 
Strong educational partners understand specific industries and individual businesses and will develop programs with the support of industry advisory committees. At the Community College of Allegheny County, we have found this model useful. In creating a forum for industry leaders to share information and analysis, we have been able to help companies identify trends and identify their specific workforce needs. To develop on-point curricula, companies and educators must work together.
 
The educator’s training facilities are one other crucial consideration when choosing a program. Trainings can't be conducted in classrooms alone. Students need advanced, state-of-the-art labs that replicate the types of issues they will face every day on the job and where they can learn to resolve complex technical troubles.
 
As a final point, it's critical that both employers and educational partners are committed to giving and accepting continual feedback on their training programs and adjusting the program and any aspect of the curriculum when workplace conditions or requirements demand it.
 
The best time to prepare for future talent shortages is right now. With an already small talent pool from which to recruit and hire—an issue that will only intensify with time as millions of manufacturing jobs are projected to go empty — manufacturing companies ought to help their existing workforce employees adapt, not let them go. When given access to continual training, incumbent workers have proven adept at seamlessly integrating new technologies and other industrial innovations into their workplaces, which generally has permitted the companies they work for to adapt to emerging trends in the global marketplace without missing a beat.
 
This article is originally posted on TRONSERVE.COM