Faustino I think your premise underestimates the employability of flight personnel outside the airlines.
While it is true the specific technical skills of willing an aircraft from A to B are not so directly applicable elsewhere, the professional experience, management skills, people skills, and resourcefulness that pilots and all other crew members exercise daily in their duties are valuable, sought-after qualities in many occupations.
The daily habits of self-discipline, situational awareness, briefing and self-testing and endlessly learning new procedures and processes are skills that form the baseline for aviation employment but are often rare and greatly desired by management in other fields of business.
Changing skins is frightening and usually involves some interim back-tracking in pay and perks, but many other occupations are accessible and open to aircrew who chose to work outside of aviation. Some even pay better and feel better after a while.
Just as the chosen alternates sometimes come in handy under IFR, it makes sense to have some occupational harbours in mind for bouts of rough weather in one's industry.
-----
As for ground-controlled aircraft - when you do the math, good people are going to be smarter and more effective - and cheaper overall - for a long time to come.
The cases where remote controls are most effective are:
A very well-defined environment/envelope where:
-- weight/space/power are at a very high premium
-- capital and technical support cost are not limiting
and there is also some other primary justification such as extraordinary risk (military) , or relatively few variables (industrial) , or not much consequence if the process fails (experimental), or not a bio-compatible environment (space, reactors, parts of Arfica)