Earlier quoted context omitted.
I replaced a person with a one line code change (performance tuning) - they got her another job though. Literally had a business call to see if they could run another instance of $LOB_SOFTWARE because they had a person clicking a button for 40 hours a week.
That kind of work is easy to automate. Until you reach a situation when it has to be decided when a person has to click the button. And with what data they are supposed to click it. Often it's not easy to make those decisions through code. That is because the person making those click decisions, has a lot of tribal knowledge of the business situation at hand, which triggers only when the situation presents itself. Bu…
That's pretty much the business model of the company I work for. We have what is essentially a call center using custom CRM/workflow software doing work that used to be done by many times more people with much more training. Instead of 5 licensed and well paid people we do the same work with one lower paid and less trained person assisted with software.
Humans are still involved to make decisions when needed and for communication, but the simple and clear stuff is automated so we can hire pretty much anyone.
It's good for our clients since we are cheaper and more efficient, but less good for the workers we're replacing who will need to find new marketable skills or fall down the ladder.