White-Collar Proletariat

The publication of Braverman’s Labor and Monopoly Capital in 1974 has stimulated a wide-ranging and lively series of debates within the social sciences. Braverman, following Marx (Capital, vol. 1), forcefully argues that the logic of capitalist production is such as to inexorably ‘deskill’ the labour process — that is, to progressively render most work in capitalist society increasingly routine and fragmented, requiring very little skill on the part of the worker. Much of his discussion concerns the ‘deskilling’ of manual work, but he also argues that nonmanual — particularly clerical — work has also been substantially ‘deskilled’. This fact has contributed to the ‘proletarianisation’ of clerical work — that is, in respect of both the nature of the work and other terms and conditions of employment, the ‘class situation’ of the clerical worker now resembles that of the manual ‘proletariat’. One of our major objectives, therefore, in carrying out the empirical research which forms much of the substance of this book was to examine the non-manual labour process to ascertain the extent to which ‘deskilling’ had, in reality, occurred. An important factor informing our research was the impact of computers, a feature which has increasingly affected clerical work since the 1960s.

In the first section of this chapter we will briefly review the historical and theoretical debate surrounding the class location of clerical and administrative workers — particularly as it bears on the issue of clerical ‘proletarianisation’. In the second section, we will describe the evolution of the ‘clerical’ category — focusing largely on Britain — reviewing not only its proportional and numerical growth but also terms and conditions of employment, salary levels and the feminisation of clerical work. In the third section, we will return again to the ‘proletarianisation’ issue, paying particular attention both to recent refutations of the thesis and the implications of the debate for class theory more generally.

‘Work situation’ —‘the position of the individual in the social division of labour’ (Lockwood, 1958, p. 15) refers both to the nature of the work itself and the social relationships — particularly between superiors and inferiors — characteristic of particular employment. Both of these elements were emphasised by Lockwood in his description of clerical work and the clerical class situation in the late 1950s. In small offices, Lockwood suggested that the social relationships of the ‘counting-house’ era — that is, a relatively close relationship between superior and subordinate — still persisted. However, in large organisations, bureaucratic rationalisation was already well established, and clearly there could be no close, personal relationship between employer and employed. Nevertheless, even in large bureaucracies, individual working groups tended to be small, ensuring close working relationships with superiors. In any case, bureaucratic administration was frequently modified by ‘administrative particularism’: ‘For a hundred years the manuals of office procedure have suggested that you do not get the best out of your clerks by ordering them about bluntly’ (Lockwood, 1958, p. 79).

We have already demonstrated, particularly with reference to the male career structure, the importance of considering women in any systematic examination of the non-manual labour process. In this chapter, before presenting our empirical material, we shall briefly review some of the recent theoretical and empirical debates regarding women’s employment and their location in the class structure as a whole. We cannot pretend that our discussion will finally resolve all of the complex issues involved; as Allen has recently commented: ‘those who endeavour to analyse women’s position in the class structure enter a workshop which is lamentably ill-equipped for the task. There are few tools but, more important, little recognition that the task requires even burnished tools let alone freshly fashioned ones’ (Allen, 1982, p. 137).

At the outset of the empirical research that is described in this book, one of our major objectives was to provide information on the nature of clerical work itself. As Abercrombie and Urry have recently remarked: ‘Unfortunately, little is known about the skills required in white-collar occupations’ (Abercrombie and Urry, 1983, p. 112). This material has been summarised in Chapter 2. Given the rapid rate of technological change in respect of the nonmanual labour process, we obviously cannot claim to have delivered the final word on the subject. Nevertheless, we hope that our efforts have at least provided a basis from which future researchers of the non-manual labour process might find it useful to begin.