“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 WEF detailed in the Harvard Business Review, finds that on average 42 per cent of the “core skills” within job roles will change by 2022. That is a very short timeline, so we can only imagine what the changes will be further in the future.

The question of who should pay for reskilling is a thorny one. For individual companies, the temptation is always to let go of workers whose skills are no longer in demand and replace them 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, ultimately retraining 18,000 employers. Prepandemic, 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 filed, to take an obvious example, the pandemic meant that there were still 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 staff. The effort was a collective one and involved other companies as well as a Swedish university.

1.Research by the World Economic Forum suggests _________.

A a controversy about the “core skills”

B an urgent demand for new job skills

C an increase in full-time employment

D a steady growth of job opportunities

解析：选B。 B 细节理解题。根据Research by the World Economic Forum定位到第一段，根据第三句可知未来的工作平均42%的“核心技能”将发生变化，即未来的工作迫切需要新工作技能，故选B。

2.AT&T is cited to show _________.

A an alternative to the fire-and-hire strategy

B an immediate need for government support

C the characteristics of reskilling programs

D the importance of staff appraisal standards

解析：选A。A 细节理解题。根据AT&T定位到第二段第四句，可知AT&T是用“再培训”代替“解雇再招聘”的黄金典范，结合上文可知并不是所有公司都用“解雇”来解决问题，可见引用AT&T意在说明“再培训”能够代替“解雇再招聘”，故选A。

3.Efforts to resolve the skills mismatch in Canada _________.

A have driven up labour costs

B have proved to be inconsistent

C have met with fierce opposition

D have appeared to be insufficient

解析：选D。D 细节理解题。根据skills mismatch in Canada定位到第二段最后一句，可知即便是在高失业率的时期和地区，雇主也经常招不到人，D项“所做的努力似乎是不够的”符合原文，故选D。

4.We can learn from Paragraph 3 that there was _________.

A a sign of economic recovery

B a call for policy adjustment

C a lack of medical workers

D a change on hiring practices

解析：选C。C 推理判断题。根据第三段可知，疫情期间失业率一直很高，然后用数据说明，并用医疗领域医护人员短缺来举例。故选C。

5.Scandinavian Airlines decided to _________.

A create job vacancies for the unemployed

B prepare their laid-off workers for other jobs

C retrain their cabin staff for better services

D finance their staff’s college education

解析：选B。B 细节理解题。根据Scandinavian Airlines定位到最后一段，可知北欧航空公司决定重新培训下岗员工，让他们可以支援医护人员（上段末提到医护人员短缺），B符合题意，故选B。