Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sancho Panza

Decline In Professional Jobs Fuels Increase In Downward Mobility

Recommended Posts

Guardian 6/11/14

'More people are moving down, rather than up, the social ladder as the number of middle-class managerial and professional jobs shrinks, according to an Oxford University study.

The experience of upward mobility – defined as a person ending up in an occupation of higher status than their father – has become less common in the past four decades, the study says, leaving children of those who benefited from it with worse prospects than their parents had.

Dr John Goldthorpe, a co-author of the study and Oxford sociologist, said: “For the first time in a long time, we have got a generation coming through education and into the jobs market whose chances of social advancement are not better than their parents, they are worse.”

The UK’s boom in managerial and professional level public services and industrial jobs during the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s saw an increase in the proportion of children born into professional and managerial families. The decline in these jobs meant that the number of individuals at risk of downward mobility were higher.

Goldthorpe added: “Politicians are saying that a new generation of young people don’t have the same opportunities for social advancement as their parents, and these results seem to bear that out. The trend shows that, while social mobility has not stalled, more mobility is going in a downward direction than in the past.

“ The emerging situation is one for which there is little historical precedent and that carries potentially far-reaching political and wider social implications.”

The study looked at more than 20,000 British people born in periods from 1946, 1958, 1970 and 1980-84. Researchers used an adapted version of official socio-economic classifications that allocated individuals to seven classes ranging from “routine occupations” to “higher managers and professionals”. They compared the class of each individual when in their late 20s or 30s to that of their father. The study found that contrary to popular opinion, social mobility as a whole had not declined or ground to a halt, it was simply more likely to be downward in nature.

Across all the birth cohorts, about three quarters of men and women ended up in different class to the one they were born in, a proportion that has stayed roughly stable over time. However, the study found that inequalities in the relative chances of mobility were greater than thought, with the child of a higher professional or managerial father 20 times more likely to end up in a similarly high status job than a child with a working class father was to end up in a professional job.

Society needed to actively renew its stock of “top end” jobs if it did not want consign graduates to lower level jobs than their parents, said Goldthorpe. “We need a high-tech sector and a high-powered public sector to create demand for people with qualifications.” The study by Oxford University, with the London School of Economics and Political Sciences, is published on Thursday in the online issue of the British Journal of Sociology.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Inevitable fallout from pumping the #1 biggest expense a person faces in life.

incredible the number of conservatives that harp on about the sanctity of the principle of 'equality of opportunities' whilst simultaneously supporting policies that increase dependence on inheritance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is only going to get worse as more and more jobs are automated. Eventually all labour will be replaced, its really interesting times, I cannot see how this can be averted.

Maybe the plan is for us to all sit around being unemployed poets in million pound council houses? Its seems like thats what they are trying to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Apologies IRRO.I had a look and missed it.Mods,can you merge please.

Easy enough to do as they have different headlines. I'd have posted it too as they've took different angles with the same report. The guardian headline is better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a time when we are sending half the school leavers to Uni too. If any one was really in any doubt anyway that University was a rite of passage, a way of fulfilling parent's dreams ...graduation is akin to a wedding. And not to disappoint all those quasi public sector staff and landlords on the gravy train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need a high-tech sector and a high-powered public sector

I seen this too. LOL. We already have a high tec sector its one of the things keeping the uk on life support despite repeated attempts by government to bleed it or smash it. Those pesky creators keep surfacing and innovating!

What exactly is a high powered public sector? LOL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“We need a high-tech sector and a high-powered public sector to create demand for people with qualifications Oxford and London graduates.

The study by Oxford University, with the London School of Economics and Political Sciences, is published on Thursday in the online issue of the British Journal of Sociology.

Corrected.

The public sector has far too much power already.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a relief, I'm upset to discover I'm a complete an utter 'spaz'. Fewer jobs will mean fewer 'spazes' so I'm less likely to have to have that awkward conversation with my kids.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This study is very focused on types of employment, but it seems to have missed the fact that employment makes much less difference to your life chances than it did in the past. You can work hard, be lucky and get yourself into the top 10% of salaries but unless a property inheritance comes your way or you managed to lock in your lifetime housing costs before the year 2000 you will probably have a material standard of living lower than the median household did 20 years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

House I bought 30 years ago cost 30k and I earned a good salary of around 10k, same house sold recently for 360k, I estimate my equivalent salary now would be 40k. So it was 3x my salary and is now 9x my salary. The UK population sold down the river by governments of both colours serving their masters.

I don't see it that way - apart from Labour overseeing massive relaxation in lending standards.

It was buyers who borrowed more and more, to set higher prices.

My parents saw the same price rises, due to buyers year-on-year, agreeing to buy similar houses at higher prices..

£30K, £60K, £100K, £150K, £200K, £250K, £400K.

Even now I hear owners and imminent buyers tell me 'renting is dead money' vs jumbo mortgages. The excuse givers are the most to blame, for those buyer who set higher and higher crazy prices ("They didn't know what they were doing" / "They couldn't have expected a recession / crash").

Buyers greedy in other ways, still setting higher prices, going BTL, even now, at crazy ponzi prices. Bubble so pumped up and excuses, that it is always the renter-capitalists who lose and are punished.

http://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/showthread.php?t=5109334

Edited by Venger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is only going to get worse as more and more jobs are automated.

Yet the article suggests that more high tech jobs is the solution, despite the fact that high tech in general eliminates more jobs than it creates- which it must if the idea of 'progress' is to mean anything at all.

After all if technological progress actually created the need for more human labor instead of less human labor it would fail a basic test of what 'progress' means, at least as most people understand the term.

A technology that created more work instead of less work would be kind of pointless.

So the dream sold to us by the technologists is that more and better technology will free human beings from the drudgery of work- but they seem to have failed to work out exactly what happens to the people who are 'freed' from their jobs- and the income those jobs provide.

The answer seems to be that they will become minimum wage earning drones- not quite the bright and shiny future we were promised.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This study is very focused on types of employment, but it seems to have missed the fact that employment makes much less difference to your life chances than it did in the past. You can work hard, be lucky and get yourself into the top 10% of salaries but unless a property inheritance comes your way or you managed to lock in your lifetime housing costs before the year 2000 you will probably have a material standard of living lower than the median household did 20 years ago.

Wise words.

I find it interesting to consider the consequences. If work/effort no longer pays, those that can will either stop or leave. Those that can't will bleat for more subsidies from those that remain.

The current plan to farm the young isn't going to end well, but it will take decades to play out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We need a high-tech sector and a high-powered public sector

I seen this too. LOL. We already have a high tec sector its one of the things keeping the uk on life support despite repeated attempts by government to bleed it or smash it. Those pesky creators keep surfacing and innovating!

What exactly is a high powered public sector? LOL

Indeed

Oh dear

A lot of academics (outside highly employable mostly technical fields) support a bloated public sector purely out of self interest, the more relevant and technical ones less so, in my experience

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Telegraph article on this is a tad odd. The chart appears to show finance and business as very high risk but the article says those over 100k will be ok (including in finance). Hmm.

This is also combined with a change in population demographics of an ageing workforce. All I can see is deflation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The answer seems to be that they will become minimum wage earning drones- not quite the bright and shiny future we were promised.

Aren't (virtually) all NMW jobs going to be automated away? The answer must be a citizen's income. It simply must.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest UK Debt Slave

House I bought 30 years ago cost 30k and I earned a good salary of around 10k, same house sold recently for 360k, I estimate my equivalent salary now would be 40k. So it was 3x my salary and is now 9x my salary. The UK population sold down the river by governments of both colours serving their masters.

Short, concise, absolutely correct

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

House I bought 30 years ago cost 30k and I earned a good salary of around 10k, same house sold recently for 360k, I estimate my equivalent salary now would be 40k. So it was 3x my salary and is now 9x my salary.

This is the sort of explanation I use when talking to older family members about how multiples required to buy were much less, yet they still just don't get it!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

House I bought 30 years ago cost 30k and I earned a good salary of around 10k, same house sold recently for 360k, I estimate my equivalent salary now would be 40k. So it was 3x my salary and is now 9x my salary. The UK population sold down the river by governments of both colours serving their masters.

Even if you take into consideration the much higher rate of interest paid 30 years ago on a 25 year repayment term......it would still be better than todays low rates....with a 5% or 10% deposit over a far longer repayment term......

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/article-1633415/Mortgage-calculator-How-I-afford-borrow.html

http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/boeapps/iadb/repo.asp

You do the maths. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   209 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.