For years soci­olo­gists have been telling us that iden­tit­ies in late mod­ern­ity are fluid, not fixed, and that they’re based in our con­sumer life­styles not our work (Ran­some, 2005). Bau­man (1995) says that what marks out the poor is not the absence of paid work but their fail­ure to con­sume (or to con­sume in the right way). And whilst bene­fit regimes are ever more pun­it­ive and work­less­ness ever more mor­ally troub­ling, so much so that to be liv­ing on bene­fit is to be labelled a bene­fit cheat, and to be long term sick is to be a malingerer. Work is a sign of vir­tue still. And being a good worker requires a com­mit­ment to work. But even so, says Bau­man, it is con­sump­tion that is the integ­rat­ive force.

Non­sense. It’s work. And the cent­ral­ity of work, how­ever con­ceived, to iden­tity is never more clearly revealed when the chance to do it is removed. When busi­ness clos­ures or downs­iz­ing mean job losses. When Wool­worths can’t out­last an eco­nomic down­turn so women with 20 years of exper­i­ence lose their pur­pose (Pan­or­ama, BBC, 13th April 2009). Even when inflec­ted with other identity-anxieties (of nation­al­ity, as in the Imming­ham dis­pute; of gender in argu­ments over fam­ily bread­win­ner status), it is work.

And there will be more of this. I remem­ber one thing that made sense in A level eco­nom­ics class: hys­ter­esis. Named by eco­nom­ists (see Layard, Nick­ell and Jack­man, 1991), but need­ing a soci­olo­gical vis­ion to explain it, refers to a short term rise in unem­ploy­ment which then sticks. The unem­ployed find it increas­ingly hard to get back into work. The longer unem­ploy­ment lasts, the more likely it is to last a long time. And this is not because unem­ploy­ment pro­duces feck­less­ness and a desire to sit around on those gen­er­ous bene­fits, as the dis­course of benefit-dependency sug­gests . It is because of the social and psy­cho­lo­gical impact of job­less­ness in a world where work mat­ters, and where work iden­tity mat­ters. It is because of los­ing con­nec­tion to the world out­side home other than in medi­ated ways. It is because, regard­less of fault, when hard work is a vir­tue not work­ing means a lack of vir­tue. And it is also about a loss of skills. But to only refer to skill is to miss out the cent­ral sig­ni­fic­ance – unem­ploy­ment is felt and lived with, it is more than a status.

Bib­li­o­graphy

  1. Bau­man, Z (2005) Work, con­sumer­ism and the new poor. 2nd Ed. Maid­en­head: Open Uni­ver­sity Press.
  2. Layard, R., Nick­ell, S. and Jack­man, R. (1991) Unem­ploy­ment: Mac­roe­co­nomic Per­form­ance and the Labour Mar­ket. Oxford: Oxford Uni­ver­sity Press.
  3. Ran­some, P. (2005) Work, con­sump­tion and cul­ture: afflu­ence and social change in the twenty-first cen­tury. Lon­don: Sage Publications.