I tend to frequently get into arguments with industry peers about the AI impact in the industry. Many colleagues highlight that the impacts will take too long to reach us, as our roles are very specialized and our industry very reliant on manpower.
And I tend to disagree. Now, a recent study from the London School of Economics delivers a stark message: the rapid advance of automation and artificial intelligence has significantly widened wage inequality in Spain, hitting lower-paid workers hardest. Covering the period 2010–2019 (with effects persisting into recent years), the research uses household survey data from Spain's National Statistics Institute to build a dynamic automation index. Unlike static measures, this index accounts for how jobs evolve: some tasks become more routine and replaceable, while others shift toward non-automatable skills.
The core finding is clear and troubling. Without the displacement effects of new technologies, Spain's wage Gini coefficient (a measure of inequality where 0 is perfect equality and 100 is maximum inequality) would have been about 21.5% lower in 2019. In practical terms, this means the top 10% of earners captured a larger slice of the wage pie than they would have otherwise, while the bottom 50% and especially the poorest 10% saw their relative wage shares shrink. The bottom 10% could have seen wages rise by around 2.2% more, and the middle saw modest gains redirected upward. Automation didn't just replace jobs. It reinforced bargaining power for high-skilled workers, boosting their pay while devaluing routine tasks common in mid- and lower-wage roles (data entry, standardized admin, and certain service duties).
AI's impact, particularly from 2015 onward, mirrors this pattern: it complements high-skill work (driving wage premiums at the top) while substituting routine middle tasks, polarizing the distribution further. Technology fuels overall economic growth and productivity, but the benefits don't automatically "trickle down." Trade, globalization, education levels, and profit margins play secondary roles compared to tech-driven change. Vulnerable groups include young people with low education (waiters), older women in low-skill positions (housekeeping), and middle-income routine workers who face direct substitution by machines and algorithms (reservations, front desk).
In the hospitality and tourism sector, where many roles involve routine, predictable tasks (check-in processes, basic reservations, housekeeping coordination, standardized guest services), these dynamics are especially relevant. Entry- and mid-level positions often fall into the automatable zone, pressing wages and job security. Meanwhile, roles that integrate AI for personalization, predictive analytics, dynamic pricing, or revenue optimization tend to concentrate on higher-skilled (and higher-paid) functions, widening internal gaps.
This isn't inevitable doom. It's a call to action. The study highlights two priority policy levers to make innovation more inclusive:
1. Massive, sustained investment in education and lifelong learning
Related to what we spoke about last week, continuous training programs (short, modular, and accessible) can help workers transition. In hospitality, this means upskilling front-line staff in data interpretation, guest experience design, sustainability practices, or basic AI tool usage (chatbots, forecasting apps) rather than leaving them exposed to substitution.
2. Fiscal rebalance incentives between capital and labor
Many tax systems (including Spain's) favor investment in machinery and software over hiring people, subsidizing automation even when productivity gains are marginal. Adjusting capital taxation, offering credits for human-capital investments, or reducing biases toward tech capex could slow excessive displacement and encourage job-creating innovation.
Technology is not the enemy. Poorly distributed gains are. By proactively reskilling, redesigning roles around human strengths, and supporting policies that share productivity dividends, the sector can turn AI from a wage-polarizing force into a broad-based opportunity. Lower- and middle-wage workers in hospitality deserve paths to higher value, better-paid contributions, and not gradual erosion.
The LSE paper reminds us: innovation without equity risks deeper divides, social friction, and even political polarization. In our industry, where people remain the heart of the experience, getting this right is essential for sustainable growth.
