Roy Harold Scherer Jr worked as a truck driver on the long haul to the top of his chosen profession. He later found film stardom under the name of Rock Hudson. Michael Dell, founder of US company Dell Computers, washed plates and was a waiter in Chinese and Mexican restaurants before he landed on a career in technology.

Such humdrum tasks once allowed ambitious people to earn cash en route to the top. For others, they were full-time jobs. But such low and semi-skilled jobs are increasingly in danger of being wiped out by the coming robotics age. Dish washing has long been automated and truck driving may be consigned to the rear-view mirror when driverless vehicles hit the streets.

This month’s Connected Business asks what workers will need to do to make their careers robot proof. But it is open to debate what this technological revolution will mean, especially for employers and workers in sectors requiring what are seen as a lower order of skills.

Tourism, traditionally viewed as a provider of low-paid, part-time, customer-facing jobs, is one industry experimenting with robots in human roles, such as receptionists.

Stephen Page, a professor of tourism management at Bournemouth university in the UK, says wide adoption of robots will depend on how and where in the world they are used. A survey by TravelZoo, an online media company, found regional variations in human acceptance of robots. Chinese tourists were the most comfortable with the idea of their use in travel, French and Germans were the least at ease.

Prof Page says: “We already know planes are flown by computer, so to a certain degree you can say a robot is flying it with human interaction to provide the safety element.”

Transport is another sector where jobs are at risk. Rachel Aldred, senior lecturer in transport at Westminster university in London, says driverless buses could improve life for staff and passengers. Past welfare studies found bus driving was stressful and unhealthy because drivers are sedentary. Being a bus conductor, however, was better for health and a less stressful occupation.

“Since then we’ve got rid of conductors but kept bus driver jobs,” Ms Aldred says. “So if you’re looking at employee health it is the wrong way round.

“Potentially, having driverless buses opens the opportunity to reinstate those conductor jobs, and to improve service quality to passengers,” she says. “It will also improve employee health.”

She says a more negative outcome would be to get rid of the driver as well as the conductor.

That choice could come down to how much money companies can save by employing robots and how unions and workers respond