We estimate the impact of firm-level automation on individual worker outcomes by combining Dutch microdata with a direct measure of automation expenditures covering all private nonfinancial sector firms. Using a novel difference-in-differences event-study design leveraging lumpy investment, we find that automation increases the probability of incumbent workers separating from their employers. Workers experience a five-year cumulative wage income loss of 9% of one year’s earnings, driven by decreases in days worked. These adverse impacts of automation are larger in smaller firms, and for older and middle-educated workers. By contrast, no such losses are found for firms’ investments in computers.

This paper shows that the United Kingdom since 1975 has exhibited a pattern of job polarization with rises in employment shares in the highest- and lowest-wage occupations. This is not entirely consistent with the idea of skill-biased technical change as a hypothesis about the impact of technology on the labor market. We argue that the “routinization” hypothesis recently proposed by Autor, Levy, and Murnane (2003) is a better explanation of job polarization, though other factors may also be important. We show that job polarization can explain one-third of the rise in the log(50/10) wage differential and one-half of the rise in the log(90/50).