In an effort to “reform” and fundamentally redefine who gets to call themselves a rights-bearing citizen of India, the BJP government introduced the National Registry of Citizens (NRC) and Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA). January and February of 2020 saw riots across India over the issue of NRC and CAA. The Indian government made a decision by passing CAA, which stated that Muslims from Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Bangladesh could not become citizens of India. The decision also resulted in the Shaheen Bagh protests where Muslim women organized a dharna, “sit in,” for weeks to protest this draconian decision. NRC/CAA meant that many Muslims who were born in India but could not produce proper documents of being from India would not be regarded as lawful citizens of India. Many Indians below the poverty line have limited access to resources such as literacy that safeguard documentation. These Indians are not limited to their religious backgrounds yet NRC/CAA targets only Muslim citizens. NRC/CAA has led to widespread debate about how citizenship is framed and the legality of the law itself. Leaders of the BJP made several speeches where they framed Muslims as outsiders and “takers” who drain Indian society.

In this introduction, we describe the purpose for this book by addressing the question of why we should care about stories. We discuss how stories form "sticky" narratives that readers might more readily remember as they engage in a wide array of resources regarding career searching. We also discuss how the inspiration for this book – Studs Terkel’s Working (1974) – leads us to offer another perspective of work: specifically, the modern experience of starting a new job. We end with an overview of what to expect in the book and how to read it.

As companies increasingly acknowledge the need to actively manage the impact of rising geopolitical tensions, they are on the hunt for geopolitical advice from trained and professional staff. Companies first scan the global landscape to assess where frictions may arise, leveraging the expertise of former government officials and professional analysts. They then need to determine which aspects are relevant for their businesses – a personalization of their scan results – followed by planning, which is an evaluation of how shifts in the geopolitical environment will affect their business. Finally, if the analysis suggests geopolitical headwinds, companies must understand how to pivot. These four steps – scanning, personalizing, planning, and pivoting – call for a combination of internal and external expertise. Geopolitical advisors, boards of directors, top management teams, government affairs teams, line managers, and cross-functional teams all have a role to play in the architectural changes that would be needed.

This chapter investigates the impact of artificial intelligence on legal services. The questions addressed include: How will artificial intelligence change and improve the legal services offered by lawyers? How will the legal profession change as a result of the increased use of artificial intelligence? How will artificial intelligence change the way lawyers work and the way they organise, charge for and finance their work? A key insight discussed concerns the focus when thinking about the impact of artificial intelligence on the work of lawyers: concentrating on the ‘tasks’ that lawyers perform reveals more insights than asking whether artificial intelligence will destroy ‘jobs’. Exploring the impact on ‘tasks’ of lawyers shows that they are both consumers and producers of services augmented by artificial intelligence. Focusing on ‘tasks’ also helps in understanding what kinds of activities are affected by artificial intelligence and which activities will be performed, at least for the foreseeable future, by human lawyers. The discussion also deals with the emergence of multidisciplinary teams and the success indicators for LawTech start-ups.

The high economic growth created jobs to reduce inequality as well as poverty. However, in the 1960s and 1970s, the effect was more than offset by other factors, like the widening wage gap between skilled and unskilled workers. There was also a large amount of transfer to the rich through the real estate market, while fiscal policy transferred little to the poor. Industrial relations were repressive. In the 1980s, inequality slowed to widen as the offsetting factors weakened and the transfer through the real estate market decreased, but industrial relations became more repressive. South Korea sustained high economic growth through the democratization process because, while staving off a possible disaster, democratization was limited in scope. Democratization failed to narrow inequality as it interacted with other forces, but it led to reforms to enhance the transparency of the economy. Independent unions emerged with democratization, but it aggravated the non-performing loans problem.

Inequality of market income rose after the 1997 crisis and then leveled off while the government redistribution increased over the years; however, the transfer to the rich through the real estate market increased immediately before the crisis. The inequality of market income rose after the crisis as the massive layoff of workers and the slowdown of growth led to job shortages and as labor market dualism deepened between large enterprises’ and small and medium-sized enterprises’ workers and regular and non-regular workers. Inequality also widened as the labor share of income fell, though the rising share of capital income was retained within firms rather than distributed to households. Unions have often failed to represent the interests of the whole working class. Welfare expenditure has risen substantially to narrow the inequality of disposable income; however, the welfare system has problems of coverage and sustainability, which are aggravated by the population's aging.

In 2005, voters in Zimbabwe performed their civic duty in the seventh election since 1980. The preceding three years were crucial to understanding the 2005 election. Many sources of violence existed in this intervening time, influenced by the referendum vendetta, the continuing land reform process, and the apparent bitterness engendered by the 2000 and 2002 election outcomes. It was crystal clear that Zanu PF’s first weapon of choice in elections was stick rather than carrot. Zanu PF viewed MDC voters as minors and Western stooges and its own supporters as adults of unquestionable loyalty and obedience. State patronage and state-sponsored violence had always taken centre stage before, during and after elections. The violent May 2005 Operation Murambatsvina was a largely state-sponsored campaign (with support from some businesses) to stifle dissent and independent economic and political activity in the country’s urban areas. The main victims of Murambatsvina were younger and unemployed, whom state security agents saw as potential recruits for social unrest. The extent of Zimbabwe’s poor human rights record was exposed by new information technology and increased reporting. As Zimbabwe prepared for the 31 March 2005 parliamentary election, Zanu PF’s campaign was decidedly violent and anti-Western.

Rerouting farming and rural livelihoods to new trajectories can help tackle increasing youth unemployment and failing food systems. While agriculture must be made more attractive by promoting ‘stepping up’, alternative livelihoods based on allied economic sectors must be considered for ‘stepping out’. Actions can be taken to invest in secondary and tertiary rural industries and improve access to adequate financial services and skills, to enhance automation and tools for more efficient development of agricultural activities, to invest in training and re-skilling of the workforce for rural dwellers to engage in agribusinesses and entrepreneurship, and to create safety-net programmes to prevent ‘falling down’ and ‘dropping out’. These actions must be inclusive of both women left behind in farming, and next-generation rural youths who are increasingly disenfranchised and prone to migration.

America faces an energy dilemma – continue down the path of oil and gas drilling or diversify to greater shares of renewable energy. The shale boom in the twenty-first century propelled America to become the largest crude oil producer in the world and a net exporter of natural gas. However, the shale bust from 2014 to 2016 prompted renewed debate on America’s pathway. For decades, successive presidents from Nixon to Obama vowed to end America’s addiction to oil. In reality, federal and state governments granted numerous privileges to the oil and gas sector in exchange for securing energy supply, jobs and tax revenue. In 2017, President Trump took office and launched his “America First Energy Plan,” which expanded oil and gas extraction, facilitated the buildout of oil and gas infrastructure, and hacked away at regulations aimed to protect health, the environment and the climate. The Trump administration’s multipronged actions to favor the oil and gas industry, which went far beyond those of previous administrations, went largely unchecked by the 115th Congress that acquiesced and even abetted its actions. Understanding what the administration did and how it was able to undertake such actions is the first step towards resetting America’s energy and environmental paths.

The final chapter lays out strategies for reducing poverty and discusses three areas of work.The first is to pursue a broader frame for the work in order to command national attention more effectively, by including people with incomes twice the poverty lines and emphasizing both the interests of people of all races and the unique interests of people of color and of women, and by fighting the ever-widening chasm of inequality as well.The second is to consolidate our work about issues of income, jobs, and cash assistance, which the chapter calls the three-legged stool.It argues that past strategies have tended to consider these areas in isolation, not thinking of them coordinately and, therefore, failing to produce the most effective results possible.Wages, quality, and income supplements for workers; job creation as needed; and cash assistance must work in tandem to get the best outcomes.Finally, to move forward in very low-income areas (both urban and rural), actors must have a perspective of place that addresses all the multiple causes that produce the high poverty.