Working-Class and Wage

Question

If a person gets a monthly or bi-weekly salary that is fixed and not hourly, can you still say that they are part of the "working class," which is defined as the workers who get a wage? As far as I know, a wage is paid out based on the hour, day, or week worked, correct? Or does wage have nothing to do with how it's clocked, but rather only to do with the fact that it's fixed, even if it is monthly or yearly? Can a man, for example, who has his own office and secretary, be called a "working-class gentleman" or "gentleman of the working class"?

Thanks.

CSnyder · Accepted Answer

Working-class is usually used to denote a particular income level, not an actual type of employment. A salaried employee (the arrangement you described) could still be working-class, depending on his income, but usually wouldn't be. Someone who rated an office and a secretary would almost never be described as working class.

Income levels are usually arranged as follows:

Poor - Working Class - Middle Class - Upper Class - Rich

with occasional subdivisions (e.g. in the US practically everyone will describe themselves as lower middle class, middle class, or upper middle class). "Rich" is almost universally used to denote those who, if they stopped working today, could sustain their lifestyle for the foreseeable future solely on investment income and/or savings. Upper class is often used to describe highly-educated professionals like doctors and lawyers who enjoy a remarkably high standard of living but are still dependent on earned income to maintain their lifestyle. The rest of the scale is basically a smooth gradient with ill-defined subdivisions.

Snarf · Answer

CSnyderSomeone who rated an office and a secretary would almost never be described as working class.

With that example that I gave, I had in mind someone who was working for a company and was given both an office and secretary by them in the company office building, so he's not paying rent for the office, nor is he paying the salary of his secretary. Both (along with his salary) are covered by the company. He's not rich and does need to work to make a living. That's why I'm thinking he's part of the working class; he's not a CEO or anything, far from it.

CSnyder Upper class is often used to describe highly-educated professionals like doctors and lawyers who enjoy a remarkably high standard of living but are still dependent on earned income to maintain their lifestyle.

So a wealthy criminal lawyer can't be considered part of the working class, even though he has to work to pay for his mortgage and the things he likes to squander on?

Fivejedjon · Answer

The rather dated expression 'working class(es)'  has little to do with 'work'. It is almost synonymous with 'lower class', and has far more to do with socio-economic  criteria than with whether people are actually working or not. A top lawyer/doctor may come from a working-class background, but s/he is not considered working class.

Snarf · Answer

fivejedjonThe rather dated expression 'working class(es)' has little to do with 'work'. It is almost synonymous with 'lower class', and has far more to do with socio-economic criteria than with whether people are actually working or not. A top lawyer/doctor may come from a working-class background, but s/he is not considered working class.

So, you mean it has to do with how much the person makes in a year, that is, whether they are in the bottom or upper income bracket? Well, that really confuses me because all the definitions I've looked up say that "working class" is the social class consisting of wage earners. They don't say anything about what that wage would have to be.

CSnyder · Answer

That's the Marxist/social science definition of "working class", which has little to no bearing on how the term is used in everyday English.

The Marxist definition of the "working class", i.e. the proletariat, includes everyone who isn't "rich" in the way that I described them above, but it's not at all in common use.

Clive · Answer

'Class' is a complex matter in Britain.

For example, when I lived there years ago, people could (and did) decide whether you were working class by observing how you ate at the table and by listening to how you spoke.

I'd be surprised if this were not still true of modern Britain.

Clive

Fivejedjon · Answer

CliveFor example, when I lived there years ago, people could (and did) decide whether you were working class by observing how you ate at the table and by listening to how you spoke.

But of course.

CliveI'd be surprised if this were not still true of modern Britain.

It's rather more hidden these days, and it's far more possible for talented people of the 'lower classes' to make their way to(wards) the top than it was in my youth. However, the right family background, school and university, and consequent networking connections are still at least as important as real intelligence and proven ability in many fields.

That is just my opinion, not an objective report.

Working-Class and Wage

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions