Article 2 Tow Coursework (2) Smiley

7/29/2019 Article 2 Tow Coursework (2) Smiley

1/24

I Cant Put a Smiley Face On:

Working-Class Masculinity,Emotional Labour and Service Workin the New Economy

Darren Nixon*

The growth of the service economy has coincided with the large-scaledetachment from the labour market of low-skilled men. Yet little researchhas explored exactly what it is about service work that is leading such mento drop out of the labour market during periods of sustained service sectoremployment growth. Based on interviews with 35 unemployed low-skilledmen, this article explores the mens attitudes to entry-level service workand suggests that such work requires skills, dispositions and demeanoursthat are antithetical to the masculine working-class habitus. This antipathyis manifest in a reluctance to engage in emotional labour and appear

deferential in the service encounter and in the rejection of many forms oflow-skilled service work as a future source of employment.

Keywords: men, masculinity, service work, emotional labour, working class

Introduction

The service sector now provides most employment in contemporaryBritain. Services currently account for over 80 per cent of all employment,

up from 60 per cent in the late 1970s (Nixon, 2005). Yet, the rise of the serviceeconomy has coincided with the large-scale detachment from the labourmarket of men. Since the late 1970s male employment has actually declined,while the number of working-age men classified as economically inactive hasdoubled from 1.4 to 2.8 million (Alcock et al., 2003). During the same periodfemale employment has expanded by over 4 million and women have takenaround two-thirds of the 6 million service jobs generated since the late 1970s(Nixon, 2005). This highly significant shift in the structure of employment

Gender, Work and Organization. Vol. 16 No. 3 May 2009


2/24

reflects traditional patterns of occupational segregation by sex.De-industrialization and the decline of employment in manufacturing has ledto the collapse of demand for the male manual workers who dominateemployment in the declining heavy industries (Green and Owen, 1998), while

the growth of the service sector has stimulated demand for the femaleworkers who have historically dominated many of the occupations found inthis sector (Bradley, 1989, 1999; Hakim, 1979; Honeyman, 2000; Simonton,1998).

Yet, economic restructuring has not affected all men equally. The mostsignificant declines in male economic activity over recent years have beenamong manual workers and men with few skills and education qualifications(Gregg and Wadsworth, 1998; Alcock et al., 2003; Faggio and Nickell, 2003).Over a third of men with no qualifications are currently economically inactive

in Britain compared to only 5 per cent of men educated to NVQ level 5 and 10per cent of men educated to NVQ level 3 (Campbell et al., 2001). Similarly,male manual workers are up to four times more likely to be unemployed asmen from managerial or professional occupational backgrounds (Campbellet al., 2001). Thus, while men with high-level skills and educational qualifica-tions continue to have very good employment prospects in the contemporaryeconomy, low-skilled manual workers are heavily over-represented amongthe general stock of long-term unemployed and economically inactive men inBritain (Alcock et al., 2003; Campbell et al., 2001; Nixon, 2005).

Older (50+) and younger (1624) men have faced particular difficulties incontemporary labour markets. Both groups exhibit economic inactivity ratesup to four times higher than men of prime working age (2440) (Alcock et al.,2003). Low-skilled younger men have experienced significantly lengthenedtransitions into work due to the decline of established routes into relativelywell paid semi-skilled and unskilled manual employment (McDowell, 2003),while older male manual workers displaced by de-industrialization andtechnological change have retreated from the labour market suffering fromdiscouraged worker effect, swelling the numbers on sickness benefit to

historically unprecedented levels (Alcock et al., 2003). These issues are exac-erbated by the fact that the industrial regions that have suffered most fromde-industrialization and male job loss also tend to be areas with relativelysluggish growth in service sector employment. Men residing in these highunemployment/low vacancy former industrial areas are significantly morelikely to experience unemployment and economic activity than others,regardless of any other factor (Green and Owen, 1998; Hogarth and Wilson,2001; Turok and Edge, 1999).

Despite the huge social significance of the large-scale detachment from

the labour market of low-skilled male manual workers (Alcock et al., 2003),few empirical studies have attempted to examine why such men are conti-

i t d t f th l b k t d i i d f t i d i

I CANT PUT A SMILEY FACE ON 301


3/24

Wadsworth, 2003). McDowell (2003) explored the employment aspirations ofworking-class male school leavers and argued that growth areas of entry-level service employment challenge a key component of working-class mas-culinity: defending the right to stick up for yourself (see also Bourgois, 1995;

Newman, 1999). McDowell (2003) suggests that the idealized embodied mas-culinity of working-class men is fundamentally at odds with the deferenceand docility required in the low-level service jobs that now dominate employ-ment opportunities for those with few skills. Lindsay and McQuaid (2004)explored the theory that entry-level service employment may be particularlyunattractive to the unemployed, although they did not theorize masculinityas a key barrier to service work. The research reported a highly significantgeneral dislike of entry-level service work with only 16 per cent of jobseekerssaying they were likely to consider entering retail, 15 per cent saying they

were likely to consider entering hospitality and 13 per cent saying they werelikely to consider entering call centre work. Being male, having little experi-ence of service work and seeking wages of 200+ per week were the keyfactors associated with the rejection of entry-level service work as a futuresource of employment. The authors also highlight the lack of empiricalresearch on the attitudes of the unemployed towards entry-level service workand call for more research into why such work may be particularly unattrac-tive to unemployed men.

This article attempts to fill this gap in the literature by offering a major

contribution to the debate on the attitudes of unemployed men towardsentry-level service work. The article reports data generated from in-depthinterviews and focus groups with 35 unemployed low-skilled men andfocuses on their attitudes towards the types of low-level service jobs that nowdominate the available vacancies in job centres. The article argues that themens masculine working-class habitus is antithetical to many forms of entry-level service work, showing that it is the high level of emotion managementrequired in many forms of service work, particularly the need to show def-erence to customers during the service encounter, that most challenged the

mens usual ways of being. It is suggested that two key factors structured theunemployed mens perceptions of service work: the sex-typing of the occu-pation and the nature of the service encounter, with the men only seekingservice employment in male-dominated occupations where the workerretains a relatively high degree of power, authority and control within theservice encounter.

The service economy

The service economy can be simply defined as an economy where mostl t i t d i th i t lth h d fi iti l

302 GENDER, WORK AND ORGANIZATION


4/24

culture throughout the economy (DuGay and Salaman, 1992; Sturdy et al.,2001, p. 3). Yet the extremely heterogeneous nature of service sector employ-ment makes generalizations on the nature of service work highly problematic(Gershuny, 1987). Therefore, it is useful to briefly disaggregate service sector

employment in Britain to gain a better understanding of the kinds of occu-pations that are growing and are accessible to unemployed men with fewskills. Conventional service sector employment analysis is based on thegrouping together of broadly similar service activities (Organisation for Eco-nomic Co-operation and Development [OECD], 2000, pp. 8183). Elfring(1989) constructs four sub-sectors of service employment in which each sub-sector is characterized by four main service activities. Although the sub-sectors cannot be considered internally homogenous due to the wide range ofoccupations they include, the model does provide a clear picture of the nature

of service sector employment growth in Britain over recent years. Elfringsmodel is the current system used by the OECD (2000) and similar to that usedby other important writers in the field (see Nixon, 2005). Table 1 presentsElfrings four service sub-sectors.

Producer services are intermediate inputs to further production serviceswhere other businesses are the primary customers, rather than households.The fastest growing activities in this sub-sector are business and financialservices. These occupations are at the forefront of the knowledge economy,making extensive use of ICT and high-skill workers (OECD, 2000, p. 82).

Producer services primarily generate highly skilled white-collar work and sothe sub-sector is a key source of employment for men and women withhigh-level skills and educational qualifications, although men outnumberwomen in top-end occupations, while women significantly outnumber menin low-level clerical occupations.

Social services is the largest service sub-sector and is characterized by thefact that many of the services provided are not sold openly on the market butare provided by the state. Skill and educational requirements are generallyhigh, although the sub-sector generates both very highly skilled and low-

skilled occupations. Women dominate many of the lower level caring,nursing and clerical occupations, but the sub-sector is also a key source ofprofessional and associate professional employment for women, althoughmen again dominate very high-level occupations.

Distributive services and personal services provide nearly half (43 per cent) ofall service employment in Britain and generate most of the low-skilled entry-level service work in the contemporary economy. These sub-sectors are there-fore a crucial source of employment for those with few skills and educationalqualifications. Distributive services includes service activities that are pro-

vided to both businesses and households (such as delivery services), whereaspersonal services are provided to households for final consumption. Much

f th l t i di t ib ti i i l l kill d d l



5/24

le1:ServiceSectorEmploymentinBritain

ubsec

tor

Produc

erservices

Distribu

tiveservices

Personalservices

Socialserv

ices

Maine

conomic

function

Intermediateinputsto

furth

erproduction

Movementofpeople,

inform

ationand

comm

odities.

Interm

ediate/final

Finalconsumption

Finalconsumption

Primar

yconsumer

Business

Businessand

house

holds

Households

Household

s

Market/non-market

Market

Market

Market

Non-market

Keyserviceactivities

Businessand

professional,

finan

cial,insurance,

realestate

Retail,w

holesale,

transp

ort,

comm

unication

Hotels,bars,

restaura

nts,

recreation,

amusem

ent,cultural,

domesti

c,personal

Governme

nt,health,

educatio

nal,misc.

socialse

rvices

emale

tomaleratio

0.81

0.71

1.45

2.07

Percentageof

employment*

16

23

10

27

Percentageofall

serviceemployment*

21

30

13

36

Annualgrowthrate**

0.53

0.22

0.15

0.48

To

talemployedin

subsector*

3,928,480

5,647,190

2,445,300

6,629,310

Educat

ion/skill

Genera

llyveryhigh

Mixed:averagein

transp

ort,lowin

retail

Generally

verylow

Mixed

bothvery

highandalsolow

levels

Employment

cond

itions

Verygood.Highpay

Mixed.Poorinretail

Poor.Low

estpaying

sector

Generallygood

ource:

adaptedfromOECD(2000)*datafor1998**1984199

8.



6/24

retail is female dominated. Transport services provide a number of male-dominated manual occupations such as driving trains, buses, coaches andtaxis and long-distance haulage and delivery services. As nearly half (45 percent) of all male employment in the service sector is provided by distributive

services it is a key area of employment for low-skilled men. In contrast,personal services generate an array of female-dominated, consumer-oriented,low-skilled interactive servicing occupations in areas like bars, restaurants,hotels and personal and domestic services.

The service economy is thus characterized by the growth of very differentkinds of work. The simultaneous growth of very highly skilled occupations inproducer and social services and very low-skilled occupations in distributiveand personal services is leading to the hollowing out, or polarization, of theemployment structure (Castells, 2000; Gallie, 1994, p. 59; Goos and Manning,

2003). Distributive and personal services represent the most accessiblesources of future employment for low-skilled unemployed and economicallyinactive men due to the large amounts of low-skilled employment they gen-erate in areas like retail, transport, hospitality and personal and domesticservices. In the latter part of the article I explore unemployed mens attitudestowards these kinds of entry-level service jobs in order to explore theirpotential as a future source of employment. First, however, it is useful todiscuss some of the sociological literature on the nature of service work,particularly womens domination of many areas of low-skilled service

employment.

Interactive service work servicing the sovereign customer

Two heavily influential concepts have emerged from the growing sociologicalliterature on service work (see Bolton, 2003; DuGay, 1996; Korczynski, 2005;Rosenthal et al., 2001; Sturdy et al., 2001; Taylor, 1998). DuGay and Salaman(1992) have argued that businesses are increasingly customer oriented

because the customer/consumer is sovereign within a service economy, whileHochschild (1983) has drawn attention to the key importance of emotionallabour the management of human feeling during social interaction inthe labour process in low-skilled service work. Both concepts highlight theincreasing significance of the relationship between the producer and theconsumer of the service and while this relationship takes many differentforms depending on the service context, the achievement of the desiredservice encounter is of critical importance when the service (and indeed theservice provider) are the products being consumed (see also Adkins, 1995;

Liedner, 1993; Sturdy et al., 2001).DuGay (1996) argues that front-line service workers in retail are encour-d t ti i i ti id tifi ti ith t t d d i



7/24

experience they are able to mobilize in the service encounter. As firms seefront-line service workers as literally, embodying the brand, soul, imageand values of the corporation, the way workers communicate, articulate andperform their emotional selves through emotional labour during the service

encounter is key (DuGay, 1996; Hochschild, 1983). Furthermore, as Nicksonet al., (2001) have argued, the way workers present their embodied selves isalso increasingly significant, especially in the style-conscious retail, hospital-ity and leisure industries. The critical importance of the service encounter andthe idea that service workers embody the corporate image or brand is placingincreasing emphasis on the personal and cultural attributes of front-lineservice workers. Thus, in growth areas of low-skilled interactive serviceemployment such as retail and hospitality, the ability to look good and soundright and being able to manage ones emotions in ways conducive to the

demands of the customer, regardless of the nature of those demands, arecritical skills (Guerrier and Adib, 2000; Nickson et al., 2001). While not alllow-skilled service work is interactive and involves direct interaction withcustomers, research has shown that over half of employees report dealingwith customers during most of their time at work (Sturdy, 1998, p. 47). Thegrowing importance of customer service throughout the economy is dissolv-ing old divisions between front-shop and back-shop work as the ability tohandle customers becomes a key skill for increasing numbers of workers inthe service economy (Department for Education and Employment [DfEE],

2000; Department for Education and Skills [DfES], 2002; Sturdy, 1998).

Servicing as womens work

The importance of the increasing need for workers to engage in emotionaland aesthetic labour is that both are thoroughly gendered forms of labour.Historians of occupational segregation by sex have long highlighted thestrong tradition of women being employed in caring occupations or those

that require friendly, attractive or charming service (Bradley, 1989, 1999;Hakim, 1979; Honeyman, 2000; Simonton, 1998). Hence, women are muchmore likely than men to be engaged in work that involves social or peopleskills (Gallie et al., 1998). It appears that employers see emotion managementand the ability to engage empathetically with customers as natural femaleskills (Bradley, 1999; Erickson and Ritter, 2001; Tyler and Taylor, 1998, 2001, p.69). Indeed, womens supposed gender-specific skills and attributes are oftencentral to the service being provided in the low-level servicing jobs that theydominate. For example, Hall (1993) argues that women do gender through

the performance of gendered scripts of good service that encourage wait-resses to be friendly, deferential and flirty (see also Adkins, 1995; Filby, 1992),

hil G i d Adib (2000 2004) t th t t t ti f



8/24

provision of service. Table 2 shows that womens historical construction asthe archetypal low-level service providers is still very much apparent in thecontemporary occupational structure.

Women dominate the consumer-oriented interactive low-skilled servicework in retail, hospitality, sales, customer service and personal and domesticservice occupations where workers are required to have excellent emotional

management skills and often need to appear highly sensitive to the needs andthe demands of customers. Women also dominate care and nursing occupa-tions where the service ethos is quite different from that of the consumer-oriented services, and where workers are required to exhibit an even strongerempathy with the needs of the service users. Simonton (1998, pp. 23746) haspointed out that men also have a long history of employment in the servicesector, but that the gendered construction of skill has served to siphon off themore prestigious and better paid occupations for men. Hence, men tend todominate highly skilled occupations in producer and social services and

managerial or higher level positions, even in areas where women constitutethe majority of the low-skilled workforce, such as retail and sales (EqualO t iti C i i [EOC] 2005) L kill d t d t l t i

Table 2: Occupational segregation in selected serviceoccupations 2005

Selected occupations

Women

(%)

Men

(%)

Receptionists 96 04Hairdressers and barbers 89 11Nurses 88 12Care assistants and home carers 88 12Primary and nursery teachers 86 14Retail cashiers and checkout operators 82 18Cleaners and domestics 79 21Sales assistants 73 27Waiters and waitresses 73 27Sales and customer service 69 31Retail managers 35 65Marketing and sales managers 26 74Police officers 18 82Prison officers 14 84Security guards 12 88Taxi/cab drivers 04 96

Source: Equal Opportunities Commission (2005).



9/24

such as warehousing, distribution, transportation and protective services(police, prisons and security). In these jobs interaction with customers isrelatively low, workers need not engage in high levels of emotional labour orexhibit a deferential demeanour, and the cultural and personal attributes of

the workers are of little importance. In the protective services in particular,workers retain a relatively high degree of power and authority within theservice encounter. Where men do work in low-level service occupations theytend to work in areas very different to those that women work in. Butgenerally, it is women who dominate many areas of low-skilled service work,particularly customer-oriented interactive servicing jobs and care work.

Female domination of many growing areas of low-level servicework presents a major challenge to the low-skilled men displaced byde-industrialization and technological change because historically, men have

rarely substituted for women in the labour market and have been highlyreluctant to enter womens work as it may compromise their masculinity(Bradley, 1999; Cockburn, 1988; Fagan and Rubery, 1995; Reskin and Roos,1990; Williams, 1993). Unemployed low-skilled men generally have littleexperience in female-dominated areas of low-skilled service employment andthere is a clear mismatch between the technical and practical skills theypossess and the customer handling and communication skills required inmany service jobs (Hogarth and Wilson, 2001). Yet, as womens jobs areproviding an increasing share of employment, a very small number of men

have begun crossing over into female-dominated service jobs and a newliterature has emerged that investigates what happens to men and theirmasculinity when they do engage in such womens work (Cross andBagilhole, 2002; Lupton, 2000; Simpson, 2005; Williams, 1993, 1995).

Lupton (2000, p. 38) argues that female-dominated service employmentcarries three specific threats to mens masculinity. Firstly, mens ability toreinforce and regenerate their masculinity in the workplace is reducedbecause they cannot establish the homosocial relations that characterizemasculine work cultures (Bird, 1996). Secondly, they fear being feminized

through their exposure to women, and thirdly, they fear the threat of beingstigmatized as effeminate or gay. Cross and Bagilhole (2002) and Simpson(2005) report virtually identical findings in their studies of men working in arange of feminized service occupations. All the studies report men respond-ing to the challenges presented to their masculine identity by reconstructingtheir role and tasks within the occupation as more masculine. This reconstruc-tion sometimes took the form of men lying to their friends about their gender-atypical work. Simpson (2005) also suggests that over half of the 40 men in herstudy reported significant role-strain, generated both by internal conflicts

and from peer pressure from suspicious male friends.While these emerging studies show that some men have begun to enter

f l d i t d i ti th l hi hli ht th



10/24

unattractive to men. It is also significant that most of the men in these studiespossessed skills and qualifications that allowed them to seek relatively high-level feminized service occupations that at least offered the potential forprogression into higher status managerial roles. In contrast, the low-skilled

feminized service work accessible to poorly educated working-class menoffers few such masculine compensations. Middle-class men may thereforebe more open to feminized service work than working-class men. Thus,before looking at the attitudes towards entry-level service work of the 35unemployed low-skilled men who took part in this research, it is worthbriefly exploring why working-class masculinity may be particularly anti-thetical to low-level service work.

Working-class masculinity

Skeggs (1997) has suggested that working-class women seek to distancethemselves from this class label because of the negative stereotypes it encap-sulates. Yet, Skeggs (1997, p. 3) also acknowledges that there are very respect-able discursive positions for working-class men to inhabit. Being workingclass can be a source of respectability and pride for men and it has beenthrough carrying out particular types of work that this pride and respectabil-ity has been generated. Specifically, it is the construction of skilled manual

work and low-skilled grafting as particularly masculine forms of labour thathas enabled working-class men to inhabit positive and respectable discursivepositions in relation to women and middle-class men (Gray, 1987; McDowell,2003; Skeggs, 1997). Working-class men may invest in their class identity tothe point that they positively value not being middle class (Skeggs, 1997). Thisvalorization of male working-class experience and culture finds its strongestexpression in the form of protest or macho masculinity described by Willis(1977; see also McDowell, 2003; ODonnell and Sharpe, 2000). Willis observedhow the lads dismissed the earoles for conforming to the middle-class

values of the school and argued that(m)anual labour is associated with the social superiority of masculinity andmental labour with the social inferiority of femininity. In particular manuallabour is imbued with a masculine tone and nature that rends it positivelyexpressive of more than its intrinsic focus in work. (Willis, 1977, p. 148)

Working-class men fall short of the standards set by middle-class cerebralmasculinities that privilege intellect, academic success and non-manuallabour (McDowell, 2003). Yet, hard and heavy manual labour, or grafting has

enabled working-class men to construct themselves as quintessentially moremasculine than potentially more powerful men of the middle classes. Manuall b h th b k f id tit id lf t d



11/24

p. 17) suggests, working-class men celebrate their masculine sexuality andtheir physical (manual) culture. Due to the strength of their identificationwith manual labour and its specific importance in the construction of mas-culinity, it seems unlikely that unemployed working-class men will seek to

enter gender atypical service employment as it simply offers none of themasculine compensations provided by heavy or highly skilled manual labour(Cockburn, 1988). Furthermore, Mac An Ghail (1996, p. 67) states that

(t)here is now a considerable literature highlighting the way in whichworking-class masculinities are frequently embedded in the productivemanual skills, experience and relations of all male shop floor life.

Yet, the masculine work cultures that characterize all male shop floor life arehighly inappropriate in many service environments, and this may be a further

key factor orientating working-class men away from entry-level service work.Stress relief for example, is often achieved through relatively aggressiveforms of masculine horseplay, piss-taking, winding-up and joking (seeCollinson, 1988; Gray, 1987; Hodson, 2001). Shouting, swearing and play-fighting are all relatively acceptable forms of behaviour in back-shop manualenvironments like the factory or the warehouse, or outdoors on constructionsites, yet they are generally unacceptable behaviour in heavily managed,customer-oriented service environments. Similarly, McDowell (2003) sug-gests that the display of idealized embodied masculinity may now be serving

to disbar young working-class men from many types of entry-level servicework as while these service roles often require passive and docile bodilydeportment, responding to the demands of customer sovereignty unques-tionably is antithetical to young working-class men whose culture valorizessticking up for yourself, speaking your mind and fronting up whenchallenged.

Unemployed low-skilled men of all ages in this study experienced massivedifficulties engaging in emotional labour and hiding their true feelingswithout fronting up or shouting back when challenged by managers or cus-

tomers. Indeed, this research suggests that sticking up for yourself is a defin-ing characteristic of the masculine working-class habitus. Bourdieus (1984)concept is useful here because it stresses that class and gender are internal-ized in the subconscious as dispositions to act or think in particular ways. Asthese dispositions are embodied, they are far more deeply rooted than atti-tudes and identities. Thus, the habitus reveals social identities not just instatements and beliefs but in embodied social practice (Savage et al., 2004,p. 98). Class and gender are emphasized as things that exist underneath theskin, in our psyches, in our reflexes, so that we may unconsciously reproduce

class and gender structures through our routine social practices (Skeggs,1997). This is not to suggest that the habitus is fixed or that our usual ways ofb i t b lt d (M L d 1987) B t it d t th t h i



12/24

reconstruct themselves (Skeggs, 1997). This is borne out by the experiences ofthe low-skilled unemployed men in this study who struggled to adapt theirusual ways of being in ways appropriate to many forms of service work,effectively closing off key areas of potential employment in the contemporary

economy.

Background

The findings reported here represent a small part of an Economic andSocial Research Council-funded PhD thesis (No. R42200024311, Nixon, 2005),which explored the employment aspirations and work orientations ofunemployed men in Manchester. The city has suffered particularly severe

male employment decline as a consequence of economic restructuring.De-industrialization has pulled the guts out of the place ... leaving it lan-guishing near the bottom of many league tables of labour-market vitality(Peck and Ward, 2002, p. 3). Manchester lost a greater proportion (19 per cent)of its skilled and semi-skilled manufacturing employment than any othercomparable area in Britain during the 1980s and early 1990s (Bailey andTurok, 2000, p. 639) and male employment in manufacturing has declined bya staggering 62 per cent since the early 1970s (Giordano and Twomey, 2002,p. 54). These male job losses in manufacturing have not been significantly

offset by male employment growth in services total male employment inManchester has declined by 38 per cent since the early 1970s, which is nearlytriple the national decline of 14 per cent (Giordano and Twomey, 2002, p. 60).At the time of the research (20022003) the male economic activity rate inManchester was 62 per cent, compared to a national average of 73 per cent,while the unemployment rate was 7 per cent, compared to the national rate of4 per cent. In the most deprived, multiply disadvantaged wards of inner-cityManchester official unemployment rates were about 10 per cent, while ratesof male economic activity were below 50 per cent (Nixon, 2005).

In recent years Manchester has responded to the decline of its industrialbase by seeking to rebrand itself as a post-industrial cultural economy. Spear-headed by the redevelopment and investment stimulated through hostingthe 2002 Commonwealth Games, the citys regeneration has been built on thedevelopment of its service sector, particularly the retail, leisure, tourist, hos-pitality and creative industries. These industries were expected to provide thebulk of new employment opportunities in the city (Manchester City Council,2004). In this context, the broad aim of the research was to explore how themen displaced by de-industrialization and male job loss were responding to

radically restructured local labour markets. The research sought to exploreunemployed mens attitudes towards areas of new job growth in the service

t t h th th th f th i i M h t



13/24

Thirty-five in-depth interviews and five focus groups were conductedwith unemployed men contacted through four different training centres forthe unemployed in the city. Attendance at unemployment-training centres iscompulsory after 6 months unemployment and it was reasoned that the

low-skilled male manual workers disadvantaged by de-industrializationwere more likely to be found among the longer term unemployed attendingtraining centres than those attending job centres. Once the researcher wasgranted access to the training centres, he approached men to participate inthe research. All the requests for participation were successful. Age andethnicity were the only criteria used in selecting the unemployed men toparticipate in the case study. In terms of age, in line with the literature(see Arnot, 2004, for review), I anticipated that younger men would exhibitfundamentally different orientations to work than older men. In order

to capture such generational differences, I decided to purposively selectroughly equal numbers of men in three age bands: 1825 (13/35), 2640(12/35) and 41+ (10/35). In relation to issues of race and ethnicity, Mac AnGhail (1996) has suggested that de-industrialization has created a crisisof white, working class masculinity (see also Arnot, 2004; ODonnell andSharpe 2000), while MacLeods (1987) seminal comparison of white andblack working-class youth demonstrated that race and ethnicity has a crucialimpact on the construction of identity, masculinity and aspirations (see alsoMac an Ghail 1996, McDowell 2003). However, I did not have the resources

to examine in sufficient depth how race and ethnicity also impact on orien-tations to work and therefore selected only white unemployed men to par-ticipate in this study.

The men who participated in the research should be seen as a particularlylow-skilled, poorly educated sub-section of unemployed men. Over half hadbeen unemployed for a year or more, compared to only a quarter of allunemployed men in the UK (Nixon, 2005). Almost two-thirds (63 per cent)held no educational qualifications whatsoever, and 91 per cent held qualifi-cations at NVQ level 2 or below. In terms of their usual occupations (see

Table 3), five (15 per cent) of the men usually worked in skilled trade occu-pations, although only one of these men had a formal qualification related totheir trade. Nineteen (54 per cent) of the men usually worked in low-skilledmanual occupations, although over half (ten) of this group struggled to namea specific usual occupation because they changed jobs so frequently. One ofthe men usually worked in retail and the remaining ten (28 per cent) men hadvery little work experience to speak of. Most (eight out of ten) of the men withlittle work experience were under 24, and the other two were in their mid-thirties. In national statistics men with little work experience are classified

by the occupations they sought. As all these men were seeking low-skilledmanual work, particularly warehousing or labouring work (see Nixon, 2006),th th f b l ifi d l kill d l k Thi



14/24

workers, although in Table 3 I have classified those who changed jobs fre-quently and those with little previous experience separately to emphasize themens self-definitions.

Emotional labour and interactive service work

Aside from the younger men who generally had little formal work experi-ence, most of the men who took part in the research had carried out a varietyof male-dominated skilled, semi-skilled or unskilled manual occupations infactories and warehouses or outdoors in labouring jobs. In terms of previousexperiences of service work, driving and security were most common,although five of the men had worked for at least a year in retail and many ofthe younger men had an experience of retail through work/training place-ments. However, only one of the 35 men in the study said they usuallyworked in a service occupation (retail). For the older men in particular,low-skilled interactive service work represented quite a radical newchallenge:

S l i t t l th t t l t l I Id b f i ht d

Table 3: Usual occupations of sample

Occupation (Standard occupationalclassification 2000 major groups)

Sample

All maleunemployed

(UK)

No. Per cent Per cent

Managers and senior officials N.A. N.A. 8Professionals N.A. N.A. 5Associate professional and technical N.A. N.A. 7Administrative and secretarial N.A. N.A. 5Skilled trade occupations 5 15 21Personal services N.A. N.A. 2

Sales and customer service 1 03 6Process, plant and machine operatives 1 03 16Elementary occupations 8 23 30None* 10 28 *Various** 10 28 **Total 35 100 100

Source: Office of National Statistics 2005 (*/** data not collected on nationallevel).



15/24

really ... I think I wouldnt be good at it. Wouldnt have confidence in it.(Jim, aged 45, former sewing machine mechanic)

Not interested in shop work. Its just not my thing. I dont love it, dislike it,its just not my thing to be on a till, things like that.... Its just not my scene.

(Larry, aged 56, former mail sorter)

Jim was frightened by interactive sales work and doubted he had the nec-essary skills for services. The idea of retraining in a completely new occu-pational area at the age of 45 was a daunting prospect, as it made hisprevious work experience and current skills appear redundant. Hence, Jimwas retraining as an auto-electrician, an occupation that extensively utilizedthe skills he had developed throughout his working life. Larry was similarto Jim in that he had little experience of interactive service work and was

retraining in a familiar area forklift truck driving. Larry knew that hedidnt want to do shop work but struggled to articulate exactly why. Just asJim stated services, its not my cup of tea, Larry remarks, Its just not myscene. Dereks comments help explain exactly what it was about interactiveservice work that wasnt the mens thing. Derek had previous experience ofretail through working as a sales assistant in a furniture store a histori-cally male-dominated niche of retail due to the association of furniture withcraft skills (Simonton, 1998). However, Derek had strongly disliked the pres-sure of the sales environment and the need to chase customers. He insisted

he simply didnt have the patience for customer-facing interactive servicejobs:

Bar staff no ... not my cup of tea serving somebody drinks. Dont have thepatience for that ... checkout operator, not really good with figures, well, Iwouldnt want to do that. Telephone sales, no. Too much talking, Id losemy patience. (Derek, aged 50, former circuit board assembler)

Dereks suggestion that it is the patience required in interactive work thatis most problematic for him was a remarkable comment, because he had

worked as a circuit board assembler for 13 years, a fiddly job that requires agreat deal of patience. Derek had patience, but not when it came to servingcustomers. The implication is that it is the requirement to be what customerswant you to be (Lawson, 2000, p. 74 in Korczynski, 2005) that most chal-lenged Dereks patience. There is an implicit recognition in Dereks com-ments that interactive service work involves the subordination of the workerto the needs and requirements of customers, and although customer sover-eignty may, in fact, be an enchanting myth, especially in sales work, wherethe service worker may be required to be both deferential and authoritative in

seeking to control customers by persuading them to purchase goods or prod-ucts (Korczynski, 2005), Derek simply didnt have the ability to engage in

h id tit ith t l i hi ti ( St d 1998) It thi



16/24

the demands of customers without losing patience that turned many of themen away from customer-oriented interactive service work.

It has been suggested that younger working-class men may be more ame-nable to service work because they have little experience of the masculine

work cultures characteristic of the male-dominated heavy industries (Lindsayand McQuaid, 2004). The younger men (under 25-years old) who took part inthis study did have very limited work histories. Most had left school withno qualifications and ended up unemployed and on youth training schemes.Yet, because service work now provides an increasing share of low-skilledemployment in the economy, many of the younger men did have an experi-ence of service work gained primarily through work and training placementsin retail. Yet, rather than opening up potential areas of employment in ser-vices, these training placements actually served to turn the younger men away

from retail and other forms of interactive service work. Patience was againthe key issue:

Ive got no patience with people basically. I cant put a smiley face on, thatsnot my sort of thing. (Colin, aged 24, unskilled manual worker)

I was doing retail work, you know, sales assistant, and I just thoughtId change it, go in the warehouse ... The customers treated you like shitand you couldnt say nowt or youd get sacked ... having to take it alland you just thought, I aint taking this. (John, aged 20, warehouse

worker)

I cant it hack it in shops and that, man, no. (Jacob, aged 19, unskilledmanual worker)

If someone [a customer] gave me loads of hassle Id end up lamping them.(Graham, aged 21, unskilled manual worker)

The comments of the younger men who had experienced interactive servicework are highly revealing. In all four examples the younger men emphasize

how hard they find it to passively eat shit in the service encounter (seeKorczynski, 2005). Like Derek, discussed above, Colin had no patience withpeople and struggled to put a smiley face on, John couldnt take it, Jacobcouldnt hack it and Graham would lamp a customer who gave himhassle. Clearly, the issue of patience was central to the mens dislike ofinteractive service work. The mens resistance to eating shit was chal-lenged by the power of the customer in the service encounter. As Grahamsremark suggests, in their everyday lives the young men would front up orbecome aggressive when confronted or challenged. They would not

passively take shit from anybody. Yet, within the service encounter thecustomer is always right and therefore the young men often had to bed il d d f ti l ithi th t t B t th i l ld t d



17/24

Liedner (1993) has suggested that men have particular difficulty swallow-ing their pride and taking abuse from customers in the service encounter.This is due to the fact that masculinity is associated with power and authorityand service work involves humiliating interpersonal subordination

(Bourgois, 1995, p. 14). For Newman (1999) such subordination can serve toreinforce feelings of low self-worth among younger service workers. Theseissues are magnified in the case of young, unemployed, poorly educated menwith repeated experience of failure at school and in the labour market. Theyoung men were very defensive and highly sensitive to criticism. They wereacutely aware that their usual ways of being were wrong or inappropriate inthe service economy this had been made painfully clear by their experi-ences in the labour market and the constant focus on soft skills and attitudetraining on schemes aimed at getting them job ready. They didnt feel good

about themselves or their lives, although this was often masked by a cloak ofaggressive macho masculinity.

Thus, both the younger and older unemployed men rejected entry-levelinteractive service work as a future source of employment because it chal-lenged their patience to the extent that they couldnt control or manage theiremotional and physical reactions to customers. Their propensity to front upwhen challenged was also apparent in the mens relationships with manag-ers. Over a third of the men in the study mentioned that they had experiencedsignificant problems with managers and these difficulties sometimes led to

violence. Graham once hit a teacher on a training course, Jack head-butted amanager while working in a warehouse and Tony punched a manager whileworking in a retail outlet. These extreme examples demonstrate the extent ofthe difficulties the men had controlling their emotions when challenged orconfronted in the workplace. The men knew that their propensity to front upwas causing them major difficulties in the labour market and in the work-place, but they struggled to modify and adapt their usual ways of being. Formost men it seemed that the best way of dealing with the problem was toavoid high-stress work environments, and interactive service work, espe-

cially sales and shop work, clearly came into this category.The younger men were more likely to at least try interactive service

employment, but when they did, their habitus betrayed them. The young menstruggled and ultimately failed to keep their emotions in check in the serviceencounter because they tended to take criticism very personally and lackedthe emotional management skills and verbal dexterity to deflect or resistconfrontation in anything but an aggressive or physical manner. Bolton (2003)is right to describe interactive service workers as skilled emotion managers.As Johns tactical retreat from retail work into the warehouse highlighted, the

men struggled to perform emotional labour and hide their true feelings in theworkplace and clearly preferred back-shop environments like the warehouse,

h th f d f th d d f t d th i



18/24

Masculine service niches

The men did not find all types of service work equally unattractive. The jobsof hospital portering, driving and security work were all popular sought-

after occupations and the police force, armed forces and social work were alsomentioned as potential sources of employment. What made the men moreamenable to these service occupations? Two factors appeared key: the sex-typing of the occupation and the nature of the service encounter. The menwere remarkably consistent in rejecting any form of female-dominatedservice work. As we saw above, female-dominated jobs like telesales, check-out work, sales assistant and waiting staff were all rejected as potentialsources of employment. But although the men expressed a very strong pref-erence to work alongside other men (see Nixon, 2006) they did not explicitly

refer to the sex-typing of the occupation as a key factor in rejecting such work.Rather, the men suggested that it was the high level of customer contact andtheir inability to keep their patience and manage their emotions when dealingwith customers that led them to reject such jobs. Yet, as I discussed earlier,it is precisely because these jobs do involve a lot of emotional labour andbecause women have been constructed as having better emotional skills, thatthey are female-dominated in the first place. Furthermore, the most popularservice jobs that the men sought driving, security and hospital portering are all clearly gendered masculine and male-dominated, which suggests that

the sex-typing of the occupation was a key factor influencing the mensperceptions of service work, even if they didnt acknowledge it as such.

The second issue the nature of the service encounter was the key issuethat the men themselves highlighted when articulating their dislike ofinteractive service work. Korczynski (2005, p. 76) notes that the golden ruleof sales work is that workers should never openly disagree or argue with acustomer. Bearing in mind the mens inability to exhibit a deferentialdemeanour and their propensity to front up when challenged, it was perhapsunsurprising that sales work was seen as highly unattractive. Telesales was

seen as a particularly unattractive form of sales work because workers areoften placed under very tight surveillance and interaction with customers isoften very tightly prescribed and scripted (see Glucksmann, 2004). This kindof sales environment allows very little space for the kinds of stress relief andbanter that characterize the masculine work cultures in the manual environ-ments in which the men usually work. In contrast, the most popular andsought after service occupations allow more freedom to get out and aboutand involve much lower levels of surveillance and control. There is also farless need to engage in emotional labour in such jobs. Hospital portering was

popular, for example, because this working environment allowed the men toescape occasionally from front-line service duties and the men would bed li ith li t i f l d t ti ll f t ti l



19/24

in the service occupations that the men sought the customer is not sovereignand the worker has much greater power in the service encounter. Hence, injobs like bus-driving or taxi-driving there is little need to be deferential tocustomers and the worker both controls the vehicle and has the power to eject

the customer at any point. In security and police work the customer is morelikely to be deferential than the worker. Equally, although in the role ofhospital porter workers are required to be highly sensitive to patients needs,there is little need to be deferential.

Thus, the nature of the service occupations that the men sought suggeststhat the issue of retaining power, control and authority within the serviceencounter underpinned the mens construction of appropriate potentialservice occupations. Where service work requires deference and docility andcould be considered menial and therefore emasculating, the men rejected it

but where the men were able to retain some power within the service encoun-ter and need not show deference to customers or clients, they were far moreamenable to the work. Thus, for the low-skilled unemployed men discussedhere, masculinity is clearly associated with power, control and authoritywithin the service encounter, and emotional labour is a skill reserved forwomens jobs. In an economy where low-skilled male manual workers con-stitute the bulk of the unemployed and economically inactive, and customer-oriented sales and interactive service jobs represent the key source oflow-skilled employment, these findings are of concern, because they suggest

that the continued growth of the service economy will not alleviate thegrowing problem of male economic inactivity and unemployment. However,as Glucksmann (2004) remarks, it is also important to note that the linkageswithin the economy mean that the growth of some forms of service work, forexample regional call and distribution centres, also create openings in otherareas of the economy such as warehousing, delivery services and forklift truckdriving. This research suggests that it is these kinds of male-dominated serviceoccupations that are likely to provide the key routes back into employment forlow-skilled unemployed and economically inactive men, although it is doubt-

ful that growth in these occupations will be strong enough to absorb thegrowing number of low-skilled unemployed and economically inactive men.

Conclusions

This article has shown that the unemployed low-skilled men in the studyrejected growing forms of low-skilled customer-oriented interactive serviceemployment because such work calls for dispositions, skills and ways of

being that are antithetical to the male working-class habitus. The men rejectedfemale-dominated interactive service occupations that involved high

t f ti l l b b th t l d t th i



20/24

such work denied them the opportunity to relieve their stress in their usualways through shouting, swearing, taking the piss and having a laugh.Thus, the men remained firmly oriented towards low-skilled manual occupa-tions despite the significant symbolic and numerical decline of this form of

labour in the new economy (Savage, 2000). While previous studies havepointed out that middle-class men working in gender-atypical serviceemployment tend to attempt to re-gender the occupation as masculine, thelow-skilled unemployed men discussed here did not consider gender-atypical service work a potential future source of employment. The mencontinued to imbue manual labour with the social superiority of masculinityand implicitly constructed emotional labour as something that they didnt do.

Yet caution should be exercised in extrapolating from this the idea thatlow-skilled unemployed men are therefore consciously disbarring them-

selves from new forms of employment. The usefulness of the concept ofhabitus is that it emphasizes how classed and gendered dispositions to act orthink in particular ways are internalized in the unconscious and manifestthemselves in embodied social practices. Reconstruction is therefore notstraightforward, especially for men like those in this study, who lack thecultural capital and resources to reflexively play with their identities (Savageet al., 2001; Skeggs, 1997). The mens rejection of low-skilled female-dominated interactive service work as viable forms of future employmentshould therefore not be read as an example of masculine disdain of womens

jobs. Rather, it should be read as a defensive reaction to the increasinglyaesthetic consumerized service economy that brands these men and theirembodied skills and dispositions as redundant and deficient. Finally, it isimportant to note that the men discussed here represent a particularly low-skilled, poorly educated subset of all unemployed men. They were therefore,representative neither of all unemployed men, nor even of all unemployedworking-class men. A working-class habitus rooted in higher-level manualskills may well have more purchase in the current economy (Savage et al.,2004), although more research is needed to explore how more highly skilled

working-class men are navigating their way through contemporary service-dominated labour markets.

References

Adkins, L. (1995) Gendered Work: Sexuality, Family and the Labour Market. Buckingham:Open University Press.

Alcock, P., Beatty, C., Fothergill, S., Macmillan, R., Yeandle, S. (2003) Work to Welfare:How men become detached from the labour market. Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.



21/24

Dimitriadis, G. and Willis, P. (eds) Learning to Labour in New Times, pp. 1740.London: RoutledgeFalmer.

Bailey, N. and Turok, I. (2000) Adjustment to job loss in Britains major cities. RegionalStudies, 34,7, 63153.

Bird, S. (1996) Welcome to the mens club: homosociality and the maintenance of

hegemonic masculinity, Gender & Society, 10,2, 12032.Bolton, S. (2003) Trolley dolly or skilled emotion manager? Moving on from

Hochschilds Managed Heart. Work, Employment & Society, 17,2, 289308.Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction. London: Routledge.Bourgois, P. (1995) In Search of Respect: Selling Crack in El Barrio. Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.Bradley, H. (1989) Mens Work, Womens Work: A Sociological History of the Sexual

Division of Labour in Employment. Cambridge: Polity.Bradley, H. (1999) Gender and Power in the Workplace: Analysing the Impact of Economic

Change. Basingstoke: Macmillan.Campbell, M., Baldwin, S., Chapman, R., Johnson, S., Upton, A. and Walton, F. (2001)

Skills in England 2001. London: DfES.Castells, M. (2000) The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford: Blackwell.Cockburn, C. (1988) The gendering of jobs: workplace relations and the reproduction

of sex segregation. In Walby, S. (ed.) Gender Segregation at Work. Open UniversityPress.

Collinson, D.L. (1988) Engineering humour: masculinity, joking and conflict in shop-floor relations. Organisation Studies, 9,2, 18199.

Cross, S. and Bagilhole, B. (2002) Girls jobs for the boys? Men, masculinity andnon-traditional occupations. Gender, Work & Organization, 9,2, 20466.

Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) (2000) Skills for all. Research reportfrom the National Skills Task Force. London: DfEE.

Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2002) An Assessment of Skill Needs in theRetail Industries. London: DfES.

Elfring, T. (1989) New evidence on the expansion of service employment in advancedeconomies. Review of Income and Wealth, 35,4, 40940.

Erickson, R. and Ritter, C. (2001) Emotional labour, burnout and inauthenticity: doesgender matter? Social Psychology Quarterly, 64,2, 14663.

Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) (2005) Facts about women and men in GreatBritain. Manchester: Equal Opportunities Commission.

Fagan, C. and Rubery, J. (1995) Gender segregation in societal context. Work, Employ-ment & Society, 9,2, 21340.

Faggio, G. and Nickell, S. (2003) The rise in inactivity among adult men. In Dickens, R.,Gregg, P. and Wadsworth, J. (eds) The Labour Market Under New Labour: The State ofWorking Britain, pp. 4052. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Filby, M. (1992) The figures, the personality and the bums: service work and sexuality.Work, Employment & Society, 6,1 2345.

Gallie, D. (1994) Patterns of skill change: upskilling, deskilling, or polarisation? InPenn, R., Rose, M. and Rubery, J. (eds) Skill and Occupational Change, pp. 31951.Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gallie, D., White. M., Cheng. Y. and Tomlinson, M. (1998) Restructuring the EmploymentRelationship. Oxford: Clarendon.

DuGay, P. du (1996) Consumption and Identity at Work. London: Sage.

DuGay, P. du and Salaman, G. (1992) The cult(ure) of the customer. Journal of Man-agement Studies, 29,5, 61533.Gershuny, J.I. (1987) The future of service employment. In Giarini O. (ed.) The Emerg-



22/24

Giordano, B. and Twomey, L. (2002) Economic transitions: restructuring local labourmarkets. In Peck, J. and Ward, K. (eds) City of Revolution: Restructuring Manchesterpp. 5075. Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Glucksmann, M. (2004) Call configurations: varieties of call centre and divisions oflabour. Work, Employment & Society, 18,4, 795811.

Goos, M. and Manning, A. (2003) McJobs and MacJobs: the growing polarisation ofjobs in the UK. In Dickens, R., Gregg, P. and Wadsworth, J. (eds) The Labour MarketUnder New Labour: The State of Working Britain, pp. 7185. Basingstoke: PalgraveMacmillan.

Gray, S. (1987) Sharing the shop floor. In Kaufman, M. (ed.) Beyond Patriarchy: Essaysby Men on Pleasure, Power and Change, pp. 21634. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

Green, A.E. and Owen, D. (1998) Where are the Jobless? Changing Unemployment and NonEmployment in Cities and Regions. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Gregg, P. and Wadsworth, J. (1998) Unemployment and non-employment: unpackingeconomic inactivity. London: Economic Policy Institute.

Gregg, P. and Wadsworth, J. (2003) Labour market prospects of less skilled workers

over the recovery. In Dickens, R., Gregg, P. and Wadsworth, J. (eds) The LabourMarket Under New Labour: The State of Working Britain, pp. 8698. Basingstoke:Palgrave Macmillan.

Guerrier, Y. and Adib, S.S. (2000) No we dont provide that service: the harassment ofhotel employees by customers. Work, Employment & Society, 14,4, 689705.

Guerrier, Y. and Adib, S.S. (2004) Gendered identities in the work of overseas tourreps. Gender, Work & Organization, 11,3, 33450.

Hakim, C. (1979) Occupational Segregation: A Comparative Study of the Degree and Patternof the Differentiation Between Men and Womens Work in Britain, the United States andOther Countries. London: DfEE.

Hall, E. (1993) Smiling, deferring and flirting: doing gender by giving good service.Work and Occupations, 20,4, 45271.

Hochschild, A. (1983) The Managed Heart: The Commercialization of Human Feeling.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Hodson, R. (2001) Dignity at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Hogarth, T. and Wilson, B. (2001) Employers Skill Survey: Skills Local Areas and Unem-

ployment. London: DfEE.Honeyman, K. (2000) Women, Gender and Industrialisation in England 17001870.

Basingstoke: Macmillan.Korczynski, M. (2005) The point of selling: capitalism, consumption and contradic-

tions. Organization, 12,1, 6988.

Lawson, H. (2000) Ladies on the Lot: Women, Car Sales and the Pursuit of the AmericanDream. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.Liedner, R. (1993) Fast Food, Fast Talk: Service Work and the Routinization of Everyday Life.

London, Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Lindsay, C. and McQuaid, R. (2004) Avoiding the McJobs: unemployed jobseekers

and attitudes to service work. Work, Employment & Society, 18,2, 297319.Lupton, B. (2000) Maintaining masculinity: men who do womens work. British

Journal of Management 11,s1, 3348.Mac An Ghail, M. (1996) The Making of Men: Masculinities, Sexualities and Schooling.

Buckingham: Open University Press.McDowell, L. (2003) Redundant Masculinities. Oxford: Blackwell.

MacLeod, J. (1987) Aint No Makin It: Levelled Aspirations in a Low-income Neighbour-hood. Boulder. CO: Waterview.Manchester City Council (2004) Manchester: Shaping the City. London: Royal Institute



23/24

Newman, K. (1999) Theres No Shame in my Game: The Working Poor in the Inner City .New York: Vintage and Russell Sage Foundation.

Nickson, D., Warhurst, C., Witz, A. and Cullen A.M. (2001) The importance of beingaesthetic: work, employment and service organisation. In Sturdy, A., Grugulis, I.and Willmot, H. (eds) Customer Service Empowerment and Entrapment, pp. 17090.

Basingstoke: Palgrave.Nixon, D. (2005) Economic restructuring, unemployment and male identity in post-

industrial society. Unpublished PhD thesis. Manchester: University of Manchester.Nixon, D. (2006) I just like working with my hands: employment aspirations and the

meaning of work for low-skilled unemployed men in Britains service economy.Journal of Education and Work, 19,2, 20117.

ODonnell, M. and Sharpe, S. (2000) Uncertain Masculinities. London: Routledge.Office for National Statistics (2005) Labour Force Survey Quarterly Supplement, no.2.

London: HMSO.Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) (2000) Employment

Outlook. Paris: OECD.

Peck, J. and Ward, K. (2002) City of Revolution: Restructuring Manchester. Manchester:Manchester University Press.

Reskin, B. and Roos, P. (1990) Job Queues, Gender Queues. Philadelphia, PA: TempleUniversity Press.

Rosenthal, P., Peccei, R. and Hill, S. (2001) Academic discourses of the customer. InSturdy, A., Grugulis, I. and Willmot, H. (eds) Customer Service Empowerment andEntrapment, pp. 1837. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Savage, M. (2000) Class Analysis and Social Transformation. Buckingham: Open Univer-sity Press.

Savage, M., Bagnall, G. and Longhurst, B. (2001) Ordinary, ambivalent and defensive:slass identities in the northwest of England. Sociology, 35,4, 87592.

Savage, M., Bagnall, G. and Longhurst, B. (2004) Local habitus and working-classculture. In Devine, F., Savage, M., Scott, J. and Crompton, R. (eds) Rethinking Class:Culture, Identities and Lifestyle, pp. 95123. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Simonton, D. (1998)A History of European Womens Work, 1700 to the Present. New York:Routledge.

Simpson, R. (2005) Men in non-traditional occupations: career entry, career orientationand experience of role strain. Gender, Work & Organization, 12,4, 36380.

Skeggs, B. (1997) Formations of Class and Gender: Becoming Respectable. London: Sage.Sturdy, A. (1998) Customer care in a consumer society. Organization, 5,1,2753.Sturdy, A., Grugulis, I. and Willmot, H. (2001) Customer Service Empowerment and

Entrapment. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Taylor, S. (1998) Emotional labour and the new workplace. In Thompson, P. andWarhurst, C. (eds) Workplaces of the Future, pp. 84103. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Turok, I. and Edge, N. (1999) The Jobs Gap in Britains Cities. Oxford: Policy Press.Tyler, M. and Taylor, S. (1998) The exchange of aesthetics: womens work and the gift.

Gender, Work & Organization, 5,3, 16571.Tyler, M. and Taylor, S. (2001) Juggling justice and care: gendered customer service in

the contemporary airline industry. In Sturdy, A., Grugulis, I. and Willmot, H. (eds)Customer Service Empowerment and Entrapment, pp. 6078. Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Williams, C. (1993) Doing Womens Work. London: Sage.Williams, C. (1995) Still a Mans World: Men Who Do Womens Work. London: Univer-

sity of California Press.Willis, P. (1977) Learning to Labour: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs .Farnborough: Saxon House.



24/24

Date post:	03-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	fkkfox
View:	218 times
Download:	0 times

Article 2 Tow Coursework (2) Smiley

Documents