"Up In The Air": The Downside of Downsizing

by Rob Argento

In  the recent film "Up In The Air" actor George Clooney stars as a corporate hatchet man, a sort of hit man for-hire who specializes in downsizing a company's head count by slickly and detachedly playing out the same script, over and over again. Ryan Bingham, Clooney's character, has it all down to a fine art. Perhaps too much so for his own good.

His specialty, quite simply, is informing employees — some of them long time employees in good standing — that they are no longer needed and are hereby "let go." He then quickly follows up with words of encouragement, assuring them that this is in fact a new beginning for them, making is sound like the corporation is doing them a favor by dismissing them. I myself know from years of experience working for numerous Silicon Valley corporations that Clooney's act is not really an act at all — this truly is how downsizing is played out in the corporate world on a daily basis.

For those, however, who have never experienced corporate capitalism up close, "Up in the Air" may come as somewhat of a rude awakening. "Gee," some may wonder, "I never would have dreamed that Big Business could be so ruthless." Jason Reitman’s brilliantly directed production, on the other hand, commands us all to wake up and smell the coffee: the emerging global economy can be every bit as tragic as portrayed by Clooney and company. When anybody stands in the way of Progress, it's "Bye, bye, baby." And only a whiner or a sore loser would shed a tear over it.

As the plot progresses Reitman attempts to bring the saga of corporate downsizing up to date by introducing a high-tech, low-touch element to the whole affair of firing people — that is, firing them from afar. With remote cam-to-cam technology the hit man no longer need endure the awkward all-too-human face-to-face confrontation that a same-room meeting entails. As such it is mildly reminiscent of the video game-like quality of computerized remote warfare against an impersonal target. Only in this case the target is so-called corporate "dead wood." Either way, it's firing from a safe distance.

The high-tech element of remote downsizing is really another way of hinting at one of the chief underlying grounds for downsizing, and that is high-tech itself. Intelligent robotics on the assembly line are increasingly replacing the need for human workers. Why hire humans who complain, whine, strike, get sick, demand retirement benefits and make a nuisance of themselves in dozens of other ways when you can make a one-time purchase of a robot who works both smarter and faster than any human can and never makes a nuisance of itself? The answer is, of course, that from the business perspective there is no good reason to hire humans when you can automate them out of existence. It follows quite naturally, therefore, that you would also go high-tech with the process of downsizing itself. And though the movie does not extend this one step further it is not hard to imagine the day, fast coming upon us, when even real people like hit man Ryan Bingham will be automated out of existence by animation technologies. If you don't believe it just check out Emily in the clip down below.

Though you might still be doubtful the disturbing fact is that Emily is not flesh-and-blood. She is the digitized product of Image Metrics and might one day replace a real actor, or a real corporate hatchet man like Ryan. And if that's got you feeling a bit like your life is up in the air, just remember, it's all just the downside of downsizing.

Who knows, you might be next! Unless, of course, you come to FreedomFriends.com and stand up for We the People.