Once upon a time the term 'working class' used to be used to define honest, down-to-earth, hard working people who were often employed in traditional industries.

But now it seems that any no-hoper who has never done an honest days work in their life can call themselves working class.

So how do you define 'working class'?

Personally I think the term should be kept for those who work hard to earn a living, and a new phrase be coined for the chavs who live of the state without good cause and clog up our courts with petty crimes and anti-social behaviour.

The parasite class perhaps???

Thoughts..?

that would mean that people who would generally be called middle class would now be working class.

In addition to the working bit, i think the type of work has to be taken into account. Generally primary and secondary manufacturing jobs were considered to be 'working class', whereas tertiary (ie management, services, etc...) were not. Although that's still not specific enough, refuse collection is an example of tertiary industry, but is still a working class job.
Maybe salary vs's hourly wage is the difference.

I like the moniker of parasitic class though.

Originally posted by JBee
...So how do you define 'working class'?...
You know, after the last time I answered this sort of question, I'm not sure I dare do so again.

I know that's confusing, but do a search and you'll see what I mean.

;)

Originally posted by foo_fighter
You know, after the last time I answered this sort of question, I'm not sure I dare do so again.

I know that's confusing, but do a search and you'll see what I mean.

;)

Hi Foo_fighter,

Sorry, but I'm not interested in doing a search. The Sheffield Forum has got archive stuff on just about every topic imaginable, but there are new people joining all the time, and (hopefully) opinions changing all the time, so why shouldn't we have a new debate about it?

I'm a member and this is what I want to talk about today. I don't just want to read what's been said about it in the past - that would be like picking up an out-of-date newspaper. I want to know what people think now.

Manual labourer/ low level service worker. Basically not high level management or professionals.

Difficult to say in this day and age...

Traditionally , someone who is donig a manual / production job , someone who gets paid weekly rather than monthly perhaps???

I do agree that folk that are on the dole etc, should not be called working class. the clues in the title folks!!!

I would still class meself as w/c even though I'm a financial adviser, but thats more because of my family background (and my accent) than the work I do.

I'm confused :confused:

Channel 4 are running a series of programmes about the class system. A programme will be devoted to each class (working, middle and upper) and they start next Sunday at 8pm I do believe. The first programme is called Working Class - Salt of the Earth or Scum of the Earth. As they advertised this they showed a pic of a chav!!

Originally posted by Dick Dastardly
Channel 4 are running a series of programmes about the class system. A programme will be devoted to each class (working, middle and upper) and they start next Sunday at 8pm I do believe. The first programme is called Working Class - Salt of the Earth or Scum of the Earth. As they advertised this they showed a pic of a chav!!

From Radio Times:

The series scrutinising Britain's class system opens with a film written by Michael Collins, in which the prize-winning author explains how the white working classes have been left disenfranchised and disenchanted, and derided as yobs, racists and chavs.

Should be worth watching the series.

Defintely!!!

I'll be staying in Sunday night then..........

It definately isn't as easy to define as it used to be. In my book, you definately have to be working (or at least have a partner who's working). Anyone living on benefits and/or choosing not to work would not qualify - I was put them in the 'underclass' (not a pretty name I know).

I think it all depends on the individual's circumstances. I think the two main qualifiers would be:

- Those working in unskilled jobs
- Those with little or no qualifications

But there would still be exceptions (for instance when someone with no qualifications has been able to work their way up to a higher paid job). And there would be additions to this on a case by case basis - for example some semi-skilled jobs would still qualify.

I think there also has to be a limit on the income. I don't think classifying by sector really works anymore, as there are people in the service sector on very low pay who would definately be considered working class.

One thing I can't stand is people who are obviously middle class, claiming to be working class because they think it sounds better (sort of inverse snobs!). I knew someone at university who claimed to be working class, even though her parents were both graduates, teachers, and with an income far exceeding the dreams of real working class people.

i dont define it....i just treat people on how i find them. why bother putting people into certain brackets.

i cudunt care less if i was called working class or not.

It's very easy to define.

There's the working class, then there's the ruling class. You're one or the other, innit comrades? :D

Originally posted by banesmabes

One thing I can't stand is people who are obviously middle class, claiming to be working class because they think it sounds better (sort of inverse snobs!). I knew someone at university who claimed to be working class, even though her parents were both graduates, teachers, and with an income far exceeding the dreams of real working class people.

Defintely B! One of my mates was the same. His parents were both teachers as well..... Funny that.

Originally posted by Greenback
It's very easy to define.

There's the working class, then there's the ruling class. You're one or the other, innit comrades? :D

You got it, Greenback. :D

The proletariat are those who do not own the means of production. Pretty much all of us then....

Workers of hand and brain unite.

Looking at it from a non-Marxist perspective, I'd say on a very simplistic level that the working class are those involved in manual labour rather than office-type jobs? Those who have a trade rather than a profession?

StarSparkle

It would be interesting to see what the forum members think about which class group they belong to and why they think they belong to that particular group.

As far as I was aware the term working class didn't necessarily mean you where honest or hardworking, just that you worked for someone else.

Upper Class - Aristocracy
Middle Class - Working for themselves and employing others, e.g. factory owner.
Working Class - Working for someone else in any industry.
Lower Class - No job and rely on handouts from the state or family.

The boundaries between Middle to Lower are very blurred these days so its hard to pigeon hole anyone, unless your name is Vicky Pollard :D

Originally posted by Dick Dastardly
As they advertised this they showed a pic of a chav!!

Very original.

We have moved on from the time when you had upper, middle and lower classes, and from the non-working, working and unemployed classes. Now you are catagorised in a number of classes, I am C1 by the way!

This can be seen by the way supermarkets display and advertise themselves. Sainsbury was becoming too, how shall we say,'upmarket' so they became associated with Jamie Oliver, a lad from my neck of the woods who in turn changed the thinking on school dinners. What a coupe. Now Sainsbury have increased their, if you wish, 'working class' customer base.

It is a very complicated business now to attempt to place a person in a social group as we overlap so many.

Originally posted by BoppinBruce
This can be seen by the way supermarkets display and advertise themselves. Sainsbury was becoming too, how shall we say,'upmarket' so they became associated with Jamie Oliver

The irony being that he is a multi-millionaire who act like he's a common East-end workin' lad.

It's laughable realy.

Just thought I'd bump this thread as the first episode of Michael Collins' series is shown this evening at 2000 on C4. :)

Originally posted by nick2
The irony being that he is a multi-millionaire who act like he's a common East-end workin' lad.

It's laughable realy.

So, are you saying that the 'persona' that we see - isn't really his but one that he's created? Has he always been a mult-millionaire? I was under the impression that he's made that money from working for it and that his parents were just ordinary people.

Do you really think that the possession of money can change your upbringing and the way you think?

In my humble opinion money which has been amassed thro hard work has no bearing on someones class. people born into money are the execption than the rule in my opinion and for me dont fall into any class. I have met several very wealthy blokes who came of and still live around the east end of sheffield, they still drink and hang around the same places and show no sign of having changed or forgotton there original roots. They in my opinion show a good side to being working class.:|

everyone has an idea what difines class, but do you really want to put yourselt in a box and keep alive the class structure for rich people to feel superior

I'm not sure that rich people feel superior, they just live and behave in a different way, especially if it's what they used to call "old money". Presumably as opposed to the sort of "new money" that brooksy mentioned earlier, where people either make money or win money in some way.

I think some of us are trying to point out that possession of money is no indicator of anything about a person ... you can't change the way you were brought up or your past just because you become wealthy ... or poor for that matter.

That's like saying that if you win £10m on the lottery or lose all your wealth - you somehow change the strata of society you feel most comfortable in.

I'm looking foward to Channel Four's documentary, The Times's supplement in yesterday's paper - The Knowledge - gave it a good write-up.

I'll have to set the video.

Alex - :)

I dont like to put anyone in a "class" i like to see everyone as an indivdual, (apart) from the ones who think they are better than most "the stuck ups"... you know the type...my cars bigger than yours...my house is bigger than yours.... having items does not make you rich or a better human.

Originally posted by banesmabes
It definately isn't as easy to define as it used to be. ... I think the two main qualifiers would be:

- Those working in unskilled jobs
- Those with little or no qualifications


So, not plumbers or electricians, then?


I think there also has to be a limit on the income.

So, not a plumber on 50 grand, then?

I agree it's too vague and misused and means different thing to different people to to usefully meaningful.

--
JGH

What's it matter what 'class' you are so long as you're true to yourself and your own beliefs.

Originally posted by rubydazzler
So, are you saying that the 'persona' that we see - isn't really his but one that he's created?

Yes, even real Cockneys arn't that cockney, it's enough to make Dick Van Dyke look believable.

Originally posted by rubydazzler
So, are you saying that the 'persona' that we see - isn't really his but one that he's created? Has he always been a mult-millionaire? I was under the impression that he's made that money from working for it and that his parents were just ordinary people.

Do you really think that the possession of money can change your upbringing and the way you think?

I've always been under the impression that his family were quite well off, from the Home Counties, spoke nicely and that his geezerdom is an affectation that has propelled his career at a huge rate of knots. (See also Damon Albarn)

:huh:

Don't forget the old rule of thumb about blue/white collar workers, or just ask whether they wear a suit. The bit about employing others wouldn't work these days - how many people actually run a business compared to the numbers who you would think of as middle class?

Not sure where the collars or suit would put your 50 grand plumber though, although I guess you could get "working class with lots of money" perhaps :)

After all that I have to say I'm not really a believer in the whole class system. It doesn't achieve anything apart from prejudice.

I saw about two thirds of the C4 program last night and wasn't particularly inspired - imho he didn't really paint a very colourful picture or say anything in-depth. YMMV though!

I think the 50 grand plumber is a myth isn't it? Certainly round these parts when we've asked before no plumbers have popped up and said that they earn that much.

Originally posted by Cyclone
I think the 50 grand plumber is a myth isn't it? Certainly round these parts when we've asked before no plumbers have popped up and said that they earn that much.

They must make a fair bit though, when they charge you £150 for an hours work they must be raking it in.

Originally posted by Cyclone
I think the 50 grand plumber is a myth isn't it? Certainly round these parts when we've asked before no plumbers have popped up and said that they earn that much.

Well they wouldn't would they ? :D

But those working for themselves seem to charge around £30/hour, which if they put the hours in translates into 50 grand.

I imagine the mean is somewhere around £35-40K if they want the time to enjoy the fruits of their labour.

Originally posted by Cyclone
I think the 50 grand plumber is a myth isn't it? Certainly round these parts when we've asked before no plumbers have popped up and said that they earn that much.

Perhaps because they aren't sure who's listening? Cash in hand and all that...

I am with T020 on this, it is staggeringly complicated.

It is possible for one person to change class if their circumstances change - my parents were born working class but were educated out of it, and into the middle class, getting professional white collar jobs.

I was born middle class but lived with an unemployed husband in a terraced house in poverty for a few years, which then made me working class. Then I graduated from university and became, on another standard of definition, middle class again.

Further more, your plumber on £50k might have been to Oxford Uni but decided to go into plumbing rather than the city. He might live somewhere up the posh end of Sheffield and have children at private school.

Some people think working class means people who work, as opposed to people who do not work.

All this begs the questions, is it really relevant? What does it tell us? How useful is it really?

Originally posted by Belle
All this begs the questions, is it really relevant? What does it tell us? How useful is it really?

I think it's only important to people who want to think they are in one of the "higher" classes, what that tells us about them I don't know.

Originally posted by nick2
I think it's only important to people who want to think they are in one of the "higher" classes, what that tells us about them I don't know.

i don't think that's right.

It allows us to make generalisations, which whilst no use when looking at an individual are of great use when looking at group behaviour.