Abstract
‘BLUE-COLLAR WORK IS MISUNDERSTOOD’ is the opening line of the book Working Class: Challenging Myths about Blue-Collar Labour by Jeff Torline. That this is written in capitals is indicative of the tenor of this book. Torline’s account seeks to ‘explain why working-class people find blue-collar work rewarding and meaningful, in spite of its stresses, dangers, and physical challenges’, but then goes on to state that: ‘the book is more deeply concerned with the difference between the workers’ expressions of satisfaction and the way sociologists define their situations’ (p. 2). In summary, Torline argues that blue-collar work is undervalued because the theoretical generalizations of blue-collar work by scholars reinforce negative connotations of their work (p. 3), leading to a ‘deeply entrenched notion’ of ‘working-class inferiority’ (p. 179).
The book begins by describing both context and justification for the approach offered by Torline and then draws on the ethnographic material to argue that blue-collar work holds a promise of fulfilment for workers because they make ‘tangible, useful products through physical effort, using skills that take years to master’ (p. 42). In chapter 3 Torline then seeks to substantiate his main thesis as to ‘how’ blue-collar work has become so devalued. In this chapter Torline argues that it is mainly due to a ‘history of denial by academics of the multidimensional meaning of blue-collar work‘ (p. 43) that blue-collar work is perceived as generally being ‘lesser’ in value than white-collar work. Chapters 4–8 draw heavily on the voices of 30 American male workers to develop this argument, leaving the reader with an insight into the thoughts of others that can only emerge from ethnographic research. In chapters 9 and 10 Torline returns to the central argument about the devaluing of blue-collar work by academic (social science) analyses and concludes in chapter 11 that ‘The assertions of social science that define the class system in hierarchical terms are based on an incomplete understanding of blue-collar work, and that prejudiced conception is an important justification for a social system that looks down on working-class people’ (p. 185).
In summary, the book draws on very rich, in-depth accounts of the 30 workers interviewed by Torline to passionately argue for a revision of thinking about the ‘value’ of blue-collar work, as juxtaposed against white-collar work. Given Torline’s own work experience in this field (Torline supported his university studies by performing similar jobs), he has been able to combine a personal insight with this passion to provide an interpretation of the views of those he interviewed for the book.
A cursory examination of literature provides some support for Torline’s argument. For instance, Berger (1986) concluded that because white-collar workers ranked intrinsic characteristics such as challenge, interest or prestige as more important than extrinsic characteristics, white-collar workers gave ‘more attention’ to being challenged and stimulated by their jobs (p. 211). Hu et al. (2010), in a study of 1147 non-academic workers at an American university, concluded that because ‘more dimensions’ for each job facet they investigated emerged for white-collar workers, these workers possessed a ‘more differentiated and multi-dimensional’ evaluation of these facets than did the blue-collar workers in the sample. In summary, these evaluations once again set white-collar against blue-collar and, while not overtly making a claim that one is better than another, some could interpret an inference to this effect.
However, while informing Torline’s argument that a ‘revision of this perspective is long overdue’, methodological questions arise regarding Torline’s own account, which challenge its robustness. First, Torline’s sample is moderately small, but, very importantly, it is a non-representative sample in that there are no female stories included. Thus, it would have been more precise to title the book, Challenging Myths about (Male) Mlue-collar Labour. In fact, if Torline had included the voices of working-class blue-collar women either directly or indirectly, it would have added depth to the argument, providing Torline with the evidence to contrast how conceptualizations of women changed dramatically in Western societies with their entry into paid work. Given this is what Torline argues for (that is, ‘change in sociological theory’, see p. 20), the argument could have greatly benefited from this analysis. Let us not forget the power of Rosie the Riveter in changing our minds and those of the theorists Torline criticizes, in their reinterpretation of the working lives of women.
Torline also frequently refers to ‘other scholars’ in refuting current conceptualizations but provides little guidance as to who is being referred to in order to assess the merit of the argument. For instance Torline (p. 123) suggests that ‘[T]he logical framework of social science has interfered with the perception of complexity in blue-collar labor, but a bigger concern is the inability of scholars to take workers seriously’ – who are these scholars? Torline does finally present some substantiation in chapter 9, but it would have been worthwhile to remind the reader throughout as to ‘who’ was being referred to.
Finally, while researchers cannot avoid bias in their findings, there is undoubtedly a clear bias in this research that emerges from Torline’s experience of work. This differs from the methodology employed by ‘greats’ such as Michael Burawoy (see Manufacturing Consent) and Alain Touraine (sociological interventionism) who clearly situate these approaches as methodology. For Torline, his engagement was his own experience, but there is little explanation as to how this has been dealt with in analysing the data. Torline could have justified the research as utilizing a grounded theory design, for instance.
Perhaps in highlighting these limitations, I am myself guilty of what Torline claims: exhibiting a ‘prejudiced conception’ (p. 185). Without argument, Torline’s book touches on an extremely important issue that needs to be addressed, especially in reference to Torline’s argument that this conceptualization only serves to perpetuate an inequality, which has contributed to blue-collar workers being allocated a ‘lesser-than’ status in society (chapter 11). That is why the argument must be robustly put. In summary, Torline’s argument is not necessarily faulty, yet the methodology used creates faults. Nonetheless, the book presents a richness of voice of workers whose voices are not often heard.