February 2026
We begin this text with a proverb from the Bible attributed to King Solomon: “What has been will be again, what has been done will be done again; there is nothing new under the sun” (Ecclesiastes, Chapter 1, Verse 9, Jubilee Bible). This translates the Latin expression nihil novum sub sole (“nothing new under the sun”), reflecting the idea that the history of humankind evolves cyclically, repeating itself at regular intervals.
It is evident that addressing the future entails venturing into obscure categories. As Professors Sagardoy Bengoechea and De la Villa Gil note, “the future is an indeterminate legal concept. It always refers to what is not yet known, or to what is not yet experienced or enjoyed; but it is clear that such ignorance may project itself into the very short or very long term and, naturally, into countless intermediate timeframes.”
To speak of artificial intelligence, algorithmic logic, “datafication”, robotisation, the Fourth Industrial Revolution in relation to Labour Law, digital transformation, automation, or revolutionary waves—in short, everything that will affect the world of work—is, without doubt, to speak of the future, and to do so from a challenging standpoint.
Compared with previous industrial revolutions, the Fourth Industrial Revolution derives its power from the abundance of data (“big data”) combined with technology—in particular algorithms, artificial intelligence and high computing capacity. Consequently, a fundamental difference emerges in comparison with the earlier three revolutions, which triggered their transformative waves—among other key elements—through the introduction of steam, electricity and computers. Since the Fourth Industrial Revolution revolves around the abundance of data (“datafication”), its main characteristic makes it global, much faster in its development, and enormously impactful across countries, economies, societies and the environment. This demonstrates that digital transformation is absolute, but the respect for fundamental rights must be equally absolute, with technology placed at the service of humanity—and not humanity at the service of technology.
As with all revolutions, this technology‑driven industrial revolution has winners and losers. The winners are undoubtedly those who have channelled significant resources into researching, developing and commercialising artificial intelligence applications, enabling them to lead a silent digital revolution that has ultimately triggered global competition driven by immense economic value and technological capabilities. Digital competitiveness has thus become a political priority for all nations, particularly the most developed.
Against this backdrop, the scientific literature generally identifies four “industrial revolutions” (notwithstanding that reference is increasingly made to a forthcoming fifth):
- The First Industrial Revolution (late 13th century to 1820–1840): a period of profound economic, technological and social transformation that reshaped society and shifted the economic structure from rural to urban.
- The Second Industrial Revolution (approximately 1870–1914): characterised by economic growth resulting from technological innovation and major changes in energy sources such as gas, electricity, steel and oil. It introduced new transport and communication systems and, from a labour perspective, transformed the labour factor and corporate organisation.
- The Third Industrial Revolution, dated by some authors to 1920 and by others to 1940, though without a precise starting point. Scholars nevertheless agree that it marks the rise of the information society and major technological and scientific breakthroughs such as the internet, mobile telephony, computers and renewable energies—new communication technologies paired with new energy‑generation systems.
- The Fourth Industrial Revolution or Industry 4.0, which is already underway despite the third not being considered fully concluded. Klaus Schwab—regarded as the pioneer of the concept—describes an industrial revolution as characterised by the emergence of “new technologies and new ways of perceiving the world which drive profound change in the economy and the structure of society.”
Following this reasoning, the First Industrial Revolution is associated with steam‑based energy; the Second with science and mass production powered by electricity; the Third with computing technology; and the Fourth with artificial intelligence and technological expansion across all fields. It is the combinatorial effect of converging technologies that drives this fourth revolution: robotics, genetic mapping, 3D printing, artificial intelligence, algorithms, machine learning, the blending of biology and technology, among others. These transformations are already underway, with others yet unknown but soon to arrive. We are therefore clearly engaging in a speculative exercise regarding the consequences and outcomes that AI will generate in the labour market.
Naturally, AI benefits economic growth, as it boosts productivity and enhances a society’s capacity for production and development. However, it also replaces human labour with technology—machines.
As Coyle notes, productivity will become the key metric: it measures the efficiency with which a society converts available resources into valuable goods and services, thereby representing the main indicator of progress. This must be linked to labour productivity per hour worked, making it easier to identify the role of technology embedded in capital goods. This emphasises that periods of technological transformation are reflected in faster growth in labour productivity compared with total factor productivity.
However, measurements and statistical interpretations must not be short‑term in nature, as this would inevitably result in alarmist scenarios of massive job destruction.
AI and automation will undoubtedly eliminate certain jobs and displace others into different sectors; yet historical cycles (much longer than the narrow windows used in short‑term metrics) ultimately confirm that employment generally increases, alongside the global economy.
The main problem therefore lies in the short‑term transitional period during which certain jobs may be significantly lost. To avoid undesirable legal consequences, national policies will be crucial in managing the required transition in the labour market. Numerous examples illustrate this long‑term trend of employment growth:
- Religious scribes were replaced by the invention of the printing press, which in turn created vast new categories of employment.
- Jobs related to horses were almost entirely eliminated by the invention of the car—but this also generated millions of new jobs not only in the automotive industry but also in road construction and maintenance (and even in hospitality and fast‑food sectors, as noted by Petropoulus and Pichler).
- The same occurred with the advent of computers.
- Likewise, fears in Europe that relocating industries to lower‑cost countries would destroy jobs were tempered over time; globalisation of supply chains has ultimately created more employment as supply‑chain globalisation evolved into globalisation of services (as also referenced by Servoz).
In short, the era of data, AI and algorithms should not be a reason for concern, but rather a unique opportunity to witness a historic moment capable of improving the quality of life of millions. For example, once AI becomes sufficiently advanced in medicine, one of the main causes of human mortality—medical error—could be reduced to virtually zero.
In this regard, part of the academic literature adopts a pessimistic view, anticipating negative impacts on employment and even a future without work (as hinted by M. Ford or D. Susskind). Others, however, see technological and AI‑driven transformation as enriching human productivity and the labour market. The reality is that very few—if any—studies can predict the future accurately, mainly because each relies on different data sets and economic variables.
It is clear that there are many issues to address regarding “labour relations in the era of digital transition”. But what is equally clear is that, in all cases, we must commit to “human‑centred control”—as already noted in various guidelines, recommendations and instructions governing the use of AI systems in the legal profession and judicial activity.
And, despite all the changes to come, Labour Law will continue to accompany us, providing agile legal responses to present and future real‑world problems.
[For further discussion, see ORTEGA LOZANO, P. G. & GUINDO MORALES, S.: Las relaciones sociolaborales en la era de la transición digital: inteligencia artificial (IA), algoritmos, robótica, automatización, Big Data, compliance y tecnologías avanzadas, Granada, Comares, 2024].
Pompeyo Ortega
Of Counsel
