2021年考研英语二阅读 Text 1 原文翻译及答案解析

"Reskilling" is something that sounds like a buzzword but is actually a requirement if we plan to have a future where a lot of would-be workers do not get left behind.We know we are moving into a period where the jobs in demand will change rapidly, as will the requirements of the jobs that remain. Research by the World Economic Forum finds that on average 42 per cent of the"core skills"within job roles will change by 2022.That is a very short timeline. The question of who should pay for reskilling is a thomy one. For individual companies, the temptation is always to let go of workers whose skills are no longer in demand and replace hem with those whose skills are. That does not always happen. AT&T is often given as the gold standard of a company who decided to do a massive reskilling program rather than go with a fire-and-hire strategy. Other companies including Amazon and Disney had also pledged to create their own plans. When the skills mismatch is in the broader economy though, the focus usually turns to government to handle.Efforts in Canada and elsewhere have been arguably languid at best,and have given us a situation where we frequently hear of employers begging for workers,even at times and in regions where unemployment is high. With the pandemic, unemployment is very high indeed. In February, at 3.5 per cent and 5.5 per cent respectively, unemployment rates in Canada and the United States were at generational lows and worker shortages were everywhere. As of May, those rates had spiked up to 13.3 per cent and 13.7 per cent,and although many worker shortages had disappeared,not all had done so.In the medical field, to take an obvious example,the pandemic meant that there were till clear shortages of doctors,nurses and other medical personnel. Of course,it is not like you can take an unemployed waiter and train him to be a doctor in a few weeks,no matter who pays for it.But even if you cannot close that gap, maybe you can close others,and doing so would be to the benefit of all concerned. That seems to be the case in Sweden: When forced to furlough 90 per cent of their cabin staff, Scandinavian Airlines decided to start up a short retraining program that reskilled the laid-off workers to support hospital staf. The effort was a collective one and involved other companies as well as a Swedish university.

“再培训”听起来像是一个流行词，但实际上，如果我们计划在未来不让更多潜在工作者掉队，它就是一个必需品。我们知道我们正进入一个时期，需求旺盛的工作将迅速变化，剩余工作的需求也会如此。世界经济论坛的研究发现，到2022年，工作岗位中平均42%的“核心技能”将发生变化。这是一个非常短的时间线。谁应该为再培训买单是一个棘手的问题。对于个别公司来说，诱惑总是解雇技能不再被需要的工人，并用那些技能匹配的人替代他们。这并不总是发生。AT&T通常被视为公司决定进行大规模再培训计划而非采用裁员再雇策略的黄金标准。包括亚马逊和迪士尼在内的其他公司也已承诺制定自己的计划。然而，当技能不匹配存在于更广泛的经济中时，焦点通常转向政府来处理。加拿大和其他地方的努力可以说是充其量是缓慢的，这导致我们经常听到雇主在即使失业率高的时期和地区也恳求工人。随着疫情，失业率确实非常高。2月份，加拿大和美国的失业率分别为3.5%和5.5%，处于历史低点，到处都存在工人短缺。到5月份，这些失业率飙升至13.3%和13.7%，尽管许多工人短缺已经消失，但并非全部。以医疗领域为例，疫情意味着医生、护士和其他医务人员仍然明显短缺。当然，你不能把一个失业的服务员训练成医生，无论谁付钱。但即使你无法弥补那个差距，也许你可以弥补其他差距，这样做对所有相关方都有利。在瑞典似乎就是这种情况：当被迫让90%的机组人员休假时，北欧航空决定启动一个短期再培训计划，对被解雇的工人进行再培训，以支持医院工作人员。这项努力是集体性的，涉及其他公司以及一所瑞典大学。