The Social Mobility Agenda- Revisited

By Professor Cecile Wright

We recently saw the launch of the Conservative Liberal Democratic government’s version of a social mobility strategy (1st April, 2011). Social mobility has been the policy goal of successive post-war governments- exemplified by the creation of the Welfare State in 1945. Over the decades we have seen the post- war consensus connected to this goal dismantled during the Thatcher/Major years and attempts by the Blair/ Brown governments to resurrect the rhetoric of social mobility (eg Alan Milburn Report, 2009).
It is observed that current discussions on social mobility or more aptly referred to by Simon Jenkins as an “another national debate on Britain’s favourite sociological topic, the class system”( Guardian(6th April ,2011,p33),and are often conducted without a rigorous assessment of the significance of its cognate term. Perhaps, an apparent assessment of the term may lead to the recognition that, even though research continue to show that large inequalities of wealth and income within a society damages the social fabric and quality of live for everyone (e.g the most recent Richard Wilkinson and Kate Pickett, The Spirit Level,2009),social immobility is inherent in the structure of British society.

In my recent co-authored book – “Black Youth Matters: Transitions from School to Success”(2010), raises the issue of how some individuals overcome their negative school experiences and “succeed”( regarding educational success and/or success in the labour market). This raises the issue of whether each marginalised group can necessarily succeed- the educational system and labour market are structured so this isn’t required. Hence social mobility is only possible for limited numbers. Are the 1 million young people currently unemployed to be regarded as surplus to requirement? At the same time a certain level of social mobility does occur.

This also raises the wider issue of the prominence that education is frequently given as being the major route for social mobility/social/economic advancement. Does greater access to Higher Education, such as we have seen in the United Kingdom in the last 20 years, result in greater social mobility?
There has not been a corresponding increase in social mobility matching the increase in numbers in Higher Education. The economic structuring of the job market appears not to be changing so fundamentally that graduates are required in vastly increasing numbers. No matter how much is invested in education financially without corresponding change in the job market ,social mobility will remain relatively unchanged.


This raises the issue as to an understanding of the meaning of social mobility. For economists it is a primarily a matter of increasing income. For sociologists it is a rise in occupational status. As such a useful definition is that provided by Aldrige(2003), “the movement of opportunities for movement between different social classes or occupational groups”. However, this raises further questions. For whom is social mobility possible? What are the possibilities for those living in a deprived inner city location? Who within the class structure can be given “opportunities for movement”? Are we referring to the traditional white working class, the so called “ underclass” or just the better off lower middle class? One suspects that the mindset of those with a social mobility agenda means little more than small numbers of non-middle class individuals gaining middle class social/economic status. What about those born into middle class families who become part of the top 10% of earners via ownership or professional group status? Is this social mobility of the type we are seeking to promote?

When one examines social mobility in both the USA and US Blanden et al (2005) find that of the eight highly developed countries the UK and US have the lowest levels of social mobility. The UK has similar levels of social mobility to the US but the UK position relative to the USA has declined over recent decades. It is suggested that social mobility in the UK has become limited. Blanden et al (2005) reveals a strong correlation between social mobility and income, inequality- i.e countries with longer income differences tend to have lower social mobility. In the later twentieth century social mobility in the US declined as income differences widened. But the issue is not only one of income inequality in the UK and USA but static real wages in the USA where real wages have not increased for many years. Increase in family incomes has occurred through either multiple jobbing or more family members entering the job market. So although family income may have increased in real terms with apparent improvement in social mobility this may not be the case for individuals. The last few years have seen no increase in real wages in the UK with a prediction from the Bank of England that this will continue for some years. Will social mobility grind to a halt? Income inequality looks destined to widen with the vast majority of the wealth created in recent years going to the richest 10%. An economic system that inherently leads to this situation cannot but allow only limited social mobility.

Such data may suggest that anyone may not be able to achieve a better social/economic position for themselves and their families by their own merits and hard work. Equality of opportunity essentially means the possibility of social mobility.

Merit, agency, self determination are important in social mobility but for relatively disadvantaged groups merit based factors are not sufficient in determining opportunities for social mobility. There are structural constraints/factors involved. The class structure is clearly a significant factor for many sociologists. Goldthorpe(2004) suggests that there is little evidence of changes in social openness in the UK despite a vast investment in education aimed at improving equality of opportunity. Despite this, it has been found that there has been downward movement for some groups in the class structure in the UK. Blanden et al (2005) demonstrate that expansion of higher education in the UK has largely benefitted people with richer parents but overall has led to a fall in social mobility. Furthermore as long as low pay dominates much of the service sector- millions of people are required as part time, temporary or casual workers- the chances for escaping from this type of work would appear to be minimal.

We therefore are led to the conclusion that “social mobility” is an unclear term and would appear to mean little more than certain individuals moving upwards through occupational/ class structure. Providing more opportunities in the education system does not appear to have any marked improvement in income inequality in the UK or USA with the economic system ebbing and flowing in and out of recession and public spending being cut for those in greatest need and benefitting those already wealth, clearly, issues of social mobility are not part of the government’s serious agenda.


References


Aldridge, S (2003). The facts about social mobility: A survey of recent evidence on social mobility and its cause. New Economy, 10, (4), 189-193.

Blanden , J, Gregg, P& Machin, S (2005). Intergenerational mobility in Europe and North America. London School of Economics, Centre for Economic Performance.

Goldthrope, J. (2004). Trends in intergenerational mobility in Britain in the late twentieth century. In R. Breen (Ed.) Social mobility in Europe(pp. 195-225). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Milburn, A(2009) Unleashing Aspiration: The Final Report of the Panel of Fair Access to the Professions, Pub: Cabinet Office

Wilkinson, R, Pickett, K(2009) The Spirit Level: Why more equal societies almost always do better, Penguin Books Ltd.

Wright, C; Standen, P; Patel, T , “Black Youth Matters- Transitions from School to Success(2010), Routledge, New York.

CUTS WILL START TO BITE IN THE NEXT 12 MONTHS

It is now one year since the outcome of the General Election saw the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats form a coalition and embark on a programme of huge cuts in public spending.

Some cuts, such as the tripling of tuition fees and the abolition of the Education Maintenance Allowances, have received a lot of publicity while others have slipped through relatively unnoticed.

The austerity programme is set to last for another four years, but we have already seen decisions taken that will severely impact upon local people in Derby. Here are some examples of the annual costs of the government’s decisions on you and your family.

• The Child Trust Fund that was designed to provide a nest egg for children when they reach adulthood and was worth £250 has been scrapped.
• The rise in VAT will cost an average household an extra £275 each year.
• Removing entitlement to child benefit for people earning over £44,000 will see families losing £1,055 each year for the eldest child and £749 for younger children.
• The decision to freeze the value of child benefit will result in everyone else with children losing over £100 per annum.
• The abolition of the Health in Pregnancy grant will see new mums losing £190.
• The Winter Fuel Allowance for pensioners will be cut this winter by £50 for pensioners under 80 and by £100 for pensioners over 80.
• The Future Jobs Fund that provided financial support to employers to take on young people has been cancelled even though youth unemployment has reached a record high.

Here in Derby Conservative and Liberal Democrat Councillors have agreed huge cuts affecting local people while simultaneously signing off a contract to spend £40m refurbishing the council’s HQ!

They are planning to close six Sure Start children’s centres, four youth centres, the Silk Mill Industrial Museum and recycling facilities around the city. They will also be reducing school transport, refuse collection and library opening times.
The cuts in funding for Derby City Council, Derbyshire Police and Derbyshire Fire Service will see well over 1,000 public service workers losing their jobs. This includes 670 council workers, 178 police officers, 23 PCSOs, 49 fire fighters and 148 non-operational Police and Fire Service staff.

These public service cuts will also impact on local businesses by taking demand out of the local economy. The full impact of that is yet to be determined, but it is likely to be significant. That is why people working inside and outside the public sector should be equally concerned about the impact of the coalition’s cuts.

With fewer people in employment, tax revenues will be reduced; social security payments will increase making it more difficult to reduce the national debt. This was evident at the last budget when George Osborne announced increased borrowing of £45bn.

GIVING PARLIAMENTARY TIME TO BLOODSPORTS AT A TIME OF AUSTERITY “BEGGARS BELIEF”

Polling published by ComRes shows that 49% of members of the House of Lords would vote in favour of a repeal of the Hunting Act, while 43% would vote against. The charity that led the campaign to ban hunting says it is encouraged by a “massive shift” in peers’ views.

“Ten years ago, in March 2001, a bill to ban hunting failed by 317 votes to 68 in the House of Lords, and it took another three years to get the ban through. These new figures show how the landscape has changed – the balance of opinion in the Lords has shifted massively against hunting,” said Douglas Batchelor, chief executive of the League Against Cruel Sports.

The polling shows that 85% of peers born since 1960 oppose hunting, compared with 40%of older members.

Figures published today by the League show that a vote in the House of Commons would be lost by a significant majority. 324 MPs have said they would vote against repeal whilst 261 say they would vote in favour. Those opposing repeal include 24 Conservatives. “There is a real sense of shift in both Houses, but with the government committed to a free vote on the issue we cannot be complacent,” said Mr Batchelor. “At a time when everyone’s facing hardship and cuts, it beggars belief that some politicians want to start legalising bloodsports that the vast majority of the public find abhorrent.”

“The modern House of Lords prides itself on really standing up for the views of the public and we have no doubt they’d see sense on this issue,” Mr Batchelor added.

Polling by Ipsos MORI in December found that 76% of the public support the ban on fox hunting, whilst 84% support the ban on hare coursing and stag hunting.