IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2605.03767.html

Did US Worker Retraining Reduce Participant Automation Exposure?

Author

Listed:
  • Julian Jacobs
  • Jordan Canedy

Abstract

This paper evaluates whether the U.S. Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) supported American worker resilience to technological automation. Analyzing over 23 million WIOA participation records (2017-2023), we introduce the "Retrainability Index," which measures program outcomes through post-intervention wage recovery and shifts in Routine Task Intensity (RTI). We show WIOA rarely shifts workers into less automation-exposed work, with a significant portion of participants simply returning to their prior field. Successful outcomes driven mostly by wage gains, possibly due to "catch-up" mean reversion, rather than changes in occupation. Outcomes are moderated by a person's prior occupational skill set and area of work, as well as their local economy. We find evidence that employer led programs--notably apprenticeships--are associated with the highest incidence of success. This suggests the United States' existing public active labor market programming can support baseline wage recovery for vulnerable populations, but is not well-equipped to support the large-scale, cross-industry labor transitions.

Suggested Citation

  • Julian Jacobs & Jordan Canedy, 2026. "Did US Worker Retraining Reduce Participant Automation Exposure?," Papers 2605.03767, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2605.03767
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2605.03767
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2605.03767. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.