There has been a major change in the distribution of power within these institutions. A “traditional” family is no longer dominated by the father figure as often both parents work (nurseries are now common place), women are demanding the same salaries and benefits as men and many jobs which used to be gender specific are no longer. Rather than creating uncertainty, these changes are creating greater diversity and without doubt are a step towards greater equality of all family members, furthermore the Equal Pay Act of 1970 and its 1983 Amendment have helped reduce the gender pay inequality.
The way in which we work has changed dramatically within the last 50 years - a ‘job for life’ has become practically extinct. Many changes such as the decrease in the manufacturing industry and advances in technology has changed the way in which we work and the skills that are required. ‘A job for life’ offered a sense of belonging – companies were loyal to their staff and vice versa. Unfortunately this is no longer the case and because the work that we do forms a huge part of someone’s identity, it undoubtedly has an unsettling effect.
Although many changes have meant that the gender inequality gap is lessening, there doesn’t seem much we can do about the fact that companies are employing workforces abroad and using technology to link them back to the UK. For example, unbelievably it is cheaper for a company to relocate a call centre abroad, employ English speaking staff (and train them in the ‘English’ way) and re-direct calls half way across the world, rather than keeping the call centre in the UK. These new work ethics can seem very threatening and does create uncertainty because not even local jobs can be guaranteed.
It has been due to advances in technology that has enabled this to be possible which leads on to the contested concept of globalisation. Globalisation is political, technological, cultural and economic, if affects everyone and its effects can be seen everywhere. It can be linked to the bringing together of distant cultures and societies, face to face at a local level, good examples of this would be Microsoft, Coca Cola, McDonalds and Starbucks. This could be seen as good or bad, many people don’t like the fact that these huge companies put smaller privately owned companies out of business and that everything is becoming so uniformed – local places with ‘character’ are being lost. Global trade on the whole is increasing which may mean more jobs, better employment prospects for some but on the down side it may also mean many home communities are devastated when local companies are bought out by multi-national ones that cut wages and benefits and/or moves production overseas (as previously mentioned). This will ultimately cause conflict and again creates another area of uncertainty.
The development of a global infrastructure – the authority of nations is territorially bound therefore international organisations such as The United Nation, The World Bank, The International Monetary Fund and The World Trade Organisation all play a part in regulating and governing the global system and are new forms of agency brought about because of globalization. It could be argued that in this borderless economy, nation states have no option but to accommodate global market forces due to their power, limiting their options. Furthermore, a growth in international trade (often due to lower trade barriers) will encourage more competition. This could be seen as having winners and losers but reducing trade barriers in particular may reduce the role of governments which, in turn, could encourage corruption and possibly leaves us wondering who has control? There is no doubt that many developing countries have increased their share of world trade as a result of globalization although this may be at the detriment of the poorer countries.
With regards to the economic impacts of globalisation, applying the theme of structure and agency to that change, is it the case, for example, that some people are able to exercise agency with regard to globalization because of the position they are in or the money they have but on the other end of the scale, poorer people might be dis-empowered by globalization and therefore not able to exercise agency. Individuals could feel somewhat powerless if they are unable to exercise control over the changes that are taking place which will ultimately lead to more feelings of uncertainty.
As a result of globalization, do people still feel identified with the nation’s state or do they feel more part of a global community? What we once thought of as “British” is changing – the identity of Britain is evolving to be all inclusive and far more diverse than the traditional British stereotype of 50 years ago. Moreover, not only are there uncertainties about “Britishness” but also, because of the social changes that are taking place, there is also uncertainty around other areas such as masculinity and social classes. Individuals can have dual identities, for example British Asian, and this can lead to uncertainty because it can be hard to tell where someone’s loyalties lie.
What underpins the whole area of work and welfare is the welfare system itself and there have been two transformations in the provision of the state welfare in the last 50 years. Liberalism has challenged social democracy in terms of the functioning and interpretation of the welfare state and both political ideologies represented fundamental changes in the ways the institutions of the state welfare ordered people’s lives. It may be difficult to predict where social welfare is heading in the 21st century and indeed foolhardy to do so but welfare strategies are now having tackle a plethora of new issues such as environment derogation (global warming, damage to the ozone layer, de-forestation, for example) and increased terrorism for example, as well as existing issues such as poverty and unemployment and this is definitely cause for concern.
Generally speaking, politicians do not seem to command the respect that perhaps they did thirty or forty years ago and this is probably the case in other knowledge systems too, such as medicine and religion. There seems to be a decline in trust among the general public in expert knowledge systems on the whole and this may be because not only do the public now have access to much more information through the rapid growth of communication technology but also because they have been exposed to fundamental disagreements through the access of this information (due to the introduction of the internet).
The claim that life is more uncertain now compared to how it was in the early 1950’s does seem to be attractive in terms of its empirical adequacy. In the past it might appear that people lead more settled, stereotypical lives – the men went to work while the women stayed at home to raise the children. Couples married for life – and employees had a job for life! It was much harder (and more expensive) to travel and it was clearer what was British, what was European and what was the rest of the world. The argument is comprehensive because many changes in many areas have been taking place – at home, at work, within communities, nationally and globally and several of these changes can be cause for concern, especially when the legitimacy of areas such as politics, religion and medicine all seem to be undergoing change. Change (in itself) for many can mean uncertainty and insecurity but of course many of these changes could be interpreted in giving greater opportunities for people (and it certainly means less social stigma if you don’t conform) so it’s really how we deal with changes that really matters.
(1603 words)
References
Woodward, K. (ed.), (2004) Questioning Identity: Gender, Class, Ethnicity, London, Routledge/The Open University.
Cochrane, A. and Pain, K, 'A globalizing society' in Held, D. (ed) (2004)
Gidden Reith, A. Lecture “Runaway World” (1999).
Hughes G. and Fergusson R. (ed’s) (2004) Ordering lives: family, work and welfare, London, Routledge/The Open University.
Held, D. (ed.) (2004) A globalizing world? Culture, economics, politics, London, Routledge/The Open University.
Goldblatt, D. (ed) (2004) Knowledge and the Social Sciences: Theory, Method, Practice, London, Routledge/The Open University.
