Diversity in the workplace series: 4 reasons why we shouldn’t ignore social class
The British class system is alive and well; it just continues to evolve. Traditionally there have been 3 social classes in the UK: (i) working class; (ii) middle class; and (iii) upper class. Whereas perhaps 50 years ago we had a rather static view on class; in 21st century which group one belongs to now means different things to different people. In fact, according to Professor Savage from LSE, the three-tiered class structure is now obsolete and there are 7 social classes ranging from Precariat (the poorest and most deprived social group) to the Elite (the wealthiest and most privileged group). There is a social class calculator which can be used to determine what group you belong to.
Why does this matter?
Class is currently not a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010. This is despite research suggesting that social class discrimination is rife. Yet there does not appear to be any public appetite for a legislative change. Despite this, I set out below 4 reasons why I we believe that we need to tackle social class diversity in the workplace.
4 reasons why we shouldn’t ignore class when considering diversity in the workplace
- Because it makes good business sense: It is now considered a truism that diversity in the workplace is a good thing. According to the Work Foundation, it can lead to improved performance, improved employer image, improved brand awareness, an increase in creativity and innovation, as well as providing an environment where customers feel at home. All of the above is deemed to give diverse organisations a competitive advantage. So if we recognise that diversity as a concept is good, there is no reason not to include different social classes into the mix.
- Because it has a big impact on job prospects and career development: According to Mr Savage’s research, Elites unsurprisingly dominate high-paid jobs. For instance, research has shown that in 2014 70% of jobs offered at top law, finance and accountancy firms were given to individuals who were privately educated. Further, it is not only that the Elites dominate in highly paid jobs; their children tend to earn more in the top industries than those whose parents were not in high-salary jobs. So even if someone from a lower socio-economic class is able to get a seat at the table with their Elite counterparts, they will be less well fed.
- Because it is self-perpetuating: According to a 2010 report by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the UK was one of the worst countries for certain measures of social mobility; with parents’ wealth being a strong influencing factor on a child’s prospects of higher education and a good salary. If we wish to encourage social mobility, we cannot ignore the impact of a person’s class.
- Because we are limiting innovation: Given that research indicates that unconscious biases infect recruitment processes, I suspect that a number of talented individuals are not being recruited or promoted because of their perceived social class. Do we automatically discredit someone who speaks with a regional dialect or uses slang as part of their vernacular as lacking the necessary skills to perform a role? If so, are those implicit judgements valid and/or credible?
Summary
Whilst I believe a diverse workforce on the grounds of social class would be good for business, we also cannot ignore the social implications. Employment plays a vital part in social mobility as well as a person’s wellbeing and self-esteem. Given that the gap between rich and poor in the UK continues to widen, if we do not start to take class issues seriously we could end up living in a very divided Britain.