Russell Haggar
Site Owner
The Working Class
This document is Divided into Three Sections and Eight Parts as indicated below
Part One: Sociological Theory and the Working Class
Part Two: The Definition, Measurement and Size of the Working Class.
The Registrar General’s Classification
The NS SEC System
The Approximated Social Grade System
The Great British Class Survey
Claire Ainsley and the New Working Class
The British Social Attitudes Survey from the National Centre for Social Research
Click here for l information on the CAMSIS Scale from the Easy Sociology website and here for information from The University of Stirling. There is a very useful evaluation of the CAMSIS Scale in Class in Contemporary Britain by Ken Robets [Second Edition 2011]
Part One: Sociological Theory and the Working Class
Part Three: The Working Class, Living Standards and Life Chances
Part Four: The Boundary between the Working Class and the Middle Class: Proletarianisation and Embourgeoisement
Section Three
Part Five: The Working Class: Structure, Consciousness and Action
Part Six: The Working Class, the Underclass and the Precariat
Part Seven: The Fragmentary Working Class: Class. Gender and Ethnicity. [I hope to cover Age, Disability and Sexuality in a forthcoming document]
Part Eight: Summary
Section Three: Part Five: The Working Class: Structure, Consciousness and Action
At the beginning of this document, I referred briefly to the briefly the competing theoretical analyses of the working class provide by Marx, Weber, Functionalist sociologists, the New Right, theorists of late modernity and theorists of postmodernity. Marx also claimed that class conflict between the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat was endemic and inevitable since it derived from the economic exploitation of the Proletariat by the Bourgeoisie. This conflict would eventually intensify due to the contradictions of capitalism which would result in the immiserisation of the Proletariat, leading to the growth of revolutionary working-class consciousness and the revolutionary overthrow of the capitalist system. Capitalism would then be replaced gradually by a classless communist utopia in which the State would gradually wither away. Thus, in Marxist theory the capitalist system determined the class structure, and the contradictions of capitalism would strengthen working-class consciousness and result in revolutionary class action. status.
Whereas Marx' theories are based round an inherent class conflict between the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat which will erupt in revolution once the Proletariat have overcome their false class consciousness, Weber argued that although some class conflict might well be present, it would be more muted than that suggested by Marx – for example, because status differences within the working class would undermine working-class unity. Therefore, there was no necessary reason why working-class consciousness and class conflict should increase and lead to socialist-inspired revolution; in any case, even if so-called socialist revolutions did occur, they were likely to result in the consolidation of the power of a new socialist state bureaucracy rather than to the emancipation of the working class.
In more recent sociological approaches, the possible development of revolutionary working class consciousness is considered to be highly unlikely. Based on the studies of Goldthorpe, Lockwood, Bechhofer and Platt, and Marshall, Rose, Newby and Vogler and Devine we may draw the following broad conclusions. [See Section Two for further information on these studies]
- The Goldthorpe, Lockwood, Bechhofer and Platt [GLBP] study relied to a considerable extent on the approach to class imagery which had been developed by David Lockwood who claimed that whereas proletarian traditionalists adopted a class-based conflict model of society, middle class people were more likely to adopt a hierarchical non -conflict based model.
- It was then argued that the new affluent workers in the GLBP study adopted a so-called money model of society which downplayed the significance of class conflict and that these workers were characterised by an instrumental collectivism rather than the solidaristic collectivism which allegedly characterised proletarian traditionalists.
- However, it soon came to be argued that Lockwood’s approach was based upon theoretical concepts of class imagery which did not exist in practice, and it was argued for example in a study by Stephen Hill in a study of London dockers [1976] that these workers who might have been expected to espouse a proletarian traditionalist class consciousness did not in fact do so.
- Marshall, Rose, Newby and Vogler[MRNV] [1998] found that both working class and middle class people were highly likely to self- identify with a social class; that members of both social classes believed that social class inequalities were unfair; reductions in social inequalities could best be achieved by reform rather than revolution; but that such inequalities were unlikely to be addressed effectively by current political parties or by the trade union movement which did indeed lead to an instrumental collectivist view of politics. Yet this view was based not upon increased egoism and self-interest but on a fatalistic view as to the prospects for greater overall equality in society.
- The conclusions of Fiona Devine were rather like those of [MRNV]. She found workers to be more solidaristically collectivist than in the [GLBP] study but also to be fatalistic for the same reasons mentioned in the [MRNV] study.
- Finally, we may consider some of the results from a recent British Social Attitudes study conducted by the National Centre for Social Research which provides information on differing class images of UK society. Those who subscribe to Types A, B and C suggest that the working class is relatively large. Click here for an LSE item which provides further information on the British Social Attitudes Survey British Social Attitudes Survey
Part Six: The Working Class, The Underclass and the Precariat
Also, it has been argued that the 1980s saw the beginnings of the development of an "underclass" in the UK whose living standards and opportunities are significantly worse than those of the working class as a whole. Here sociologists have distinguished between structural and cultural variants of Underclass Theory. Structural views of the theory maintain that an underclass has developed because of changes in the structure of the world economy, resulting in the deindustrialisation of capitalist economies and mass unemployment caused by the relocation of manufacturing production to developing economies with lower labour costs. On the other hand, in cultural versions of the theory, underclass membership is said to derive from the development of dependency culture deriving from excessive expansion of welfare state support which needs to be cut back if the growth of the underclass is to be reversed.
It is true that some sections of the working class are severely disadvantaged, but critics of the Underclass Theory argue that these disadvantaged groups are still visibly part of the working class as a whole. There has also been especial criticism of Charles Murray's variant of the Underclass Theory in which he explains the persistence of the underclass in terms of the cultural pathology of its members rather than in terms of wider structural factors which inhibit opportunities for disadvantaged groups no matter how hard they may try to improve their situation.
Click here for more detailed information on theories of the underclass
As has been mentioned above Professor Mike Savage and his colleagues derived a seven class schema in which they have chosen to use the term "Precariat" rather than "Underclass" to describe their most socially deprived social class because they see the latter term as particularly associated with versions of underclass theory which seek to associate the poor with cultural deprivation and welfare dependency, whereas Professor Savage and colleagues associate the Precariat with the structural inequalities endemic in capitalist society.
Also, Claire Ainsley includes the GBCS Precariat as one element as one element of the New Working Class but however those at the bottom of the UK class structure are defined it is clear that they are at far greater risk of poverty and deprivation than those in higher social classes.
{Professor Guy Standing has also written extensively on the Precariat but his definition of it differs significantly from the definition adopted by Professor Mike Savage and utilised by Claire Ainsley.
You may click here and scroll down a little for a brief summary of the ideas of Guy Standing and click here for a very useful radio discussion on The Precariat from Thinking Allowed [Starts after 12 minutes].
Dr Lisa McKenzie who speaks on the radio programme was responsible for the research on the Precariat which appears in the study by Professor Mike Savage. She has developed these ideas further in her own study entitled Getting By: Estates, Class and Culture in Austerity Britain and you may find more information about her work via the following links
Click here for an interview with Dr Lisa McKenzie: “Why being working class is damaging.”
Click here for a podcast Of Dr Lisa McKenzie discussing her book Getting By: Estates, Class and Culture in Austerity Britain
Click here for a Guardian article by Dr Lisa McKenzie
Part Seven: Working Class Fragmentation: Class, Ethnicity and Gender. [I hope to provide information on Age, Disability and Sexuality in a forthcoming document]
Throughout the 1980s it was increasingly argued that the working class had become increasingly fragmentary. As noted above Ivor Crewe had pointed to the implications for voting behaviour of the distinction between the old and the new working class while P. Dunleavy and C. Husbands in their study “British Democracy at the Crossroads” [1985] argued that class dealignment occurred because of the growth of sectoral cleavages within both the working class and the middle class as between public sector and private sector workers and between consumers of publicly and privately provided housing, health care, education and transport. Public sector workers and consumers of publicly provided services are more likely to Labour because they perceive Labour as the party most likely to improve public sector pay and conditions and to improve public services while private sector workers and consumers of privately provided services may be more likely to vote Conservative because they oppose the higher levels of taxation necessary to defend public service employment and the expansion of public services which they do not use. More recently it has been noted that political divisions exist within the working class because of differential effects of globalisation on different sections of the working class, because of differing attitudes to Scottish, Welsh, and Irish nationalism and, of course, because of differing attitudes to Brexit.
As mentioned above in their study Social Class in Modern Britain [1988], G. Marshall, D. Rose, H. Newby and C. Vogler pointed to a range of possible divisions within the working class: between workers in well-paid, secure jobs often in Southern England in expanding industries compared with their opposite; between skilled and unskilled workers; between workers in the public and in the private sector; between trade union members and non- trade union members; between employed workers and those dependent on state benefits. Further divisions based on age, disability, ethnicity, gender and sexuality exist within the working class all of which may lead to differences in interests, attitudes and behaviour.
Gender and the UK Class Structure
It is clear that for many years women's relatively low social status based upon widely accepted patriarchal assumptions resulted in high levels of gender discrimination in family life, education, employment and political influence and that this continues despite some improvement in advanced capitalist societies. Thus it has been claimed that women are far more suited to "expressive housewife mother roles rather than to employment either in professional non-manual or skilled manual occupations while due to gender discrimination in education they were denied the quality of education which would have prepared them for employment in well-paid occupations which meant that their relatively low social status arising out of various types of gender discrimination had the effects of limiting their access to higher social class occupations while their resultant lower social class occupations reinforced their low social status in society. It is argued that women are more likely than men to be employed in secondary rather than primary labour markets where primary labour markets contain full-time, skilled well paid jobs with good promotion prospects and secondary labour market jobs have none of these characteristics
However female educational achievements have increased significantly at GCSE Level, GCE Advanced Level and in Higher Education and this has resulted in some considerable improvement in their employment prospects although they continue to be under-represented relative to men in Social Class 1 but not in Social Class 2 of the NS SEC Classification which is discussed below,
Click here, and then in the table of contents click on Section 8: National Statistics Socio-economic Classification (NS SEC) for data on the NS SEC in the 2011 Census, subdivided according to Gender.
If you then refer to Figure 7 you will see that females are under-represented in NS SEC 1, 4.5 and 7 but over-represented in NS SEC 2, 3 and 6
Click here for NS -SEC data from the 2021 Census which refer only to England and Wales and Click here for a diagram illustrating membership of NS SEC class by gender.
Females may well feel that their position the class structure, or the discrimination and harassment which they face or their excessive responsibilities for housework and child care derive from their disadvantaged position as women while ethnic minority women may feel that they are disadvantaged also because of their ethnicity, and they may take actions to try to reduce gender and ethnic disadvantage as well as class disadvantage.
Click here for Sex and Power 2022 from The Fawcett Society
Click here for a BBC item [2019]on feminism and Click here for Kings College London research [2021]on perceived relative importance of different forms of inequality and here for LSE coverage[2021] of gender inequality issues.
“Race”, Ethnicity, and the UK Class Structure
The following table illustrates the composition of the NS SEC classes by ethnicity in the 2011 Census.
| Asian | Black | Mixed | White | Other | |
| Socio-economic groups | % | % | % | % | % |
| Higher managerial/administrative/professional | 7.5 | 2.1 | 1.3 | 88.2 | 1 |
| Lower managerial/administrative/professional | 4.9 | 2.7 | 1.3 | 90.5 | 0.6 |
| Intermediate occupations | 4.8 | 2.4 | 1.2 | 91 | 0.5 |
| Small employers and own account workers | 6.7 | 1.7 | 1 | 89.8 | 0.9 |
| Lower supervisory and technical | 4.7 | 2.1 | 1.1 | 91.5 | 0.7 |
| Semi-routine occupations | 5.7 | 3 | 1.3 | 89.4 | 0.6 |
| Routine occupations | 4.8 | 2.4 | 1.1 | 90.9 | 0.7 |
| Never worked/long-term unemployed | 17.5 | 6.2 | 2.5 | 71.1 | 2.7 |
| Full-time students | 15.1 | 6.5 | 3.7 | 72.3 | 2.3 |
Given the relatively large size of the White population White people inevitably predominate in all NS SEC social classes.
For further information you may click here Ethnic Groups by socio-economic status and Click here for Race and Ethnic Disparities [ House of Commons Library Briefing Paper [May 2021] See Pages 92 -97.
Addition 2025
I have received 2021 Census data from the ONS on absolute numbers of ethnic group members in each of the NS SEC classes [which my great niece has then kindly converted to percentages!] There were some technical difficulties in the conversion such that the first link below provides rounded data, and the second link provides the full data but with the NS SEC categories organised in alphabetical order rather than in numerical order from NS SEC 1 to NS SEC 7.
Thus, you can use the first link to see the overall picture with rounded data, but you will need to use the second link if you wish to see differences of less than 1% between different ethnic groups. For example, via the first link you will see that 9% of Pakistanis and of Black Caribbeans are in NS SEC 1 but via link 2 you will see that the actual figures were 8.81% for Pakistanis and 8.52% for Black Caribbeans.
Click here For NS SEC data : rounded percentage data with related Excel chart
In the 1970s John Rex and Sally Tomlinson argued from a Weberian perspective that ethnic minority members were accorded relatively low status in society and were consequently were especially likely to face discrimination in the education system , the housing market and in employment . Consequently ethnic minority members who were also working class could be regarded as constituting an underclass as a result of their low status in society It is vital to note that Rex and Tomlinson recognised that this did not apply to those ethnic minority members who were part of the middle class. Also, of course, these authors certainly did not identify with the cultural versions of the underclass theory which would later be developed by Charles Murray and others.
At the time these Weberian theories were disputed by Marxists who variously argued that ethnic minority members might be seen as part of a divided working class [Castles and Kosack]. a united working class [Westergaard and Ressler] or a racialised class fraction [ Miles and Phizacklea.]
In any case , however, and despite the discrimination which they continue to face it soon became increasingly clear that in general minority members could be found throughout the UK class structure and also that there were significant differences in the social class situations of different ethnic groups which called into question the validity of both the Weberian and Marxist theories although it seems clear that both the Weberian and Marxist theories do help to explain the disadvantaged class situations which some ethnic minority members face. Thus, with regard to the Weberian theories it might well be argued that ethnic minority members do face discrimination based upon the lower status which they are accorded in society but that this does not mean that these ethnic minority members can reasonably be seen as part of an underclass. Also, interestingly in a recent study utilising a Bourdieusian framework of analysis N. Rollock, D. Gillborn, C. Vincent and S. Ball discuss the situation of ethnic minority parents in the middle class who, despite their high levels of economic, cultural, and social capital feel that, in the interactions with teachers, they are discriminated against because of their ethnicity which again gives some support to the neo-Weberian emphasis on the status situation of ethnic minority groups.
Click here for a black feminist perspective on social inequality from Lola Okolosie [Guardian December 2013]
Some Sources on “The White Working Class”
|
In the last few years there has been a great deal of discussion of “The White Working Class”. I shall not pursue this issue here but here are a few links if you wish to do so. Click here for the politics of racism and white nationalism Click here and here and here and here for items on Revolt on the Right Click here for UN report on UK racism Click here for The Conservatives and the white working class Click here for “Why the term” White Working Class” is so problematic
|
Part Eight: Summary
- Although we might initially adopt a simplified working definition of social class as “a large group of people whose economic circumstances, usually measured by their occupations, incomes and wealth are broadly similar”it is also necessary to recognise the importance of the divisions within the working class. Differences in skill may well result in differences in income and possibly in differences in authority in the work place and working conditions. Divisions within the working class may intensify due to ethnic, gender and other non-class differences within the working class and because of differing opinions, say toward politics in general and toward issues such as Scottish and Welsh independence and, most recently, to Brexit.
- Sociologists also distinguish between objective and subjective aspects of social class membership and have also discussed membership of the working class via the so called SCA approach to class analysis which focuses on the extent to which class structures might or might not affect class consciousness and class action.
- The concept of social class is analysed from competing perspectives: Marxism, Weberianism, Functionalism, The New Right, Late Modernity, Postmodernity.
- Key social class schemas are the Registrar General’s Classification, the Market Research Schema often used in studies of voting behaviour, the NS SEC schema and the Great British Class Survey.
- Also important are Claire Ainsley’s analysis of the New Working Class and data on social class from British Social Attitudes surveys published by the National Centre for Social Research.
- Estimates of the size of the working class vary significantly as between these sources.
- Members of the working class are on average socially and economically disadvantaged in important respects relative to members of the middle and upper classes.
- These factors indicate that essentially the working class is disadvantaged because of its subservient economic position within the capitalist system but it is argued, most notably by Marxists, that the economic subservience of the working class is reinforced by its limited influence over the institutions of the state. However, in democratic pluralist theories of the state it is argued that the working class can exercise more political power via social democratic parties [such as the Labour Party in the UK] and via other sympathetic pressure groups such as, especially, the trade unions and via welfare oriented groups such as the Child Poverty Action Group and Shelter. Alternative theories of political power and the state are outlined here.
- The boundary between the working class and the middle class has been analysed in the theories of Proletarianisation and Embourgeoisement. You should be familiar with the studies of Lockwood, Goldthorpe, Crompton and Jones, Goldthorpe, Lockwood, Bechhofer and Platt, Marshall, Newby, Rose and Vogler and Devine.
- The voting behaviour of the working class has been analysed in detail and it has been concluded that working class support for Labour is weaker now than it was in the 1950s.
- Marx suggested that the working class would eventually develop a revolutionary class consciousness which would lead to the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism. Instead, although the working class are conscious of the social and economic disadvantages which theory face, they are certainly not currently a revolutionary class.
- It is important to analyse the concepts of underclass and the precariat and to assess the relationships of these concepts to the analysis of the working class.
- In their study Social Class in Modern Britain [1988], Marshall, D. Rose, H. Newby and C. Vogler pointed to a range of possible divisions within the working class: between workers in well-paid, secure jobs often in Southern England in expanding industries compared with their opposite; between skilled and unskilled workers; between workers in the public and in the private sector; between trade union members and non- trade union members; between employed workers and those dependent on state benefits. Further divisions based on age, disability, ethnicity, gender, and sexuality exist within the working class all of which may lead to differences in interests, attitudes and behaviour.
- I hope to provide further information on these non-class dimensions of social stratification later.
- I hope also that you will find this set of documents helpful