‍What does social mobility currently look like in the UK?

Social mobility in the UK is roughly comparable to other western and European nations, like France and Denmark depending on what metrics you are using. There is some evidence of success in terms of social mobility in the UK, however there is also no denying that there are still issues at hand. In the UK, class, race, gender, disability and region all play key parts in slowing social mobility, or increasing downward mobility.

Overall the argument for social mobility’s success in the UK lies in the movement of job roles. People are just as likely to move occupational groups, but compared to 60 years ago they are more likely to be moving ‘upwards’. However, this upwards mobility in terms of job roles does not correlate with pay, even when moving ‘up’ in job roles, people today are likely to earn similar amounts to their parents, not more.

Education does seem to be a positive factor in social mobility, and an insulating factor in downward mobility for some groups. For example, downward mobility is highest among people with lower educational qualifications and people educated to degree level have a 15% risk of downward mobility compared to a 30% risk for those only educated to GCSE standard.

However, a more detailed look depicts a more complicated picture. For example, immigrants coming in with degrees from foreign countries often experience underemployment, due to their qualifications not being recognised in the UK. Although some groups such as Bangladeshi, Pakastani and Black African Muslim women have achieved significant educational progress, and that should translate to better economic return in jobs, they actually receive the lowest financial returns for their degrees. Even when controlling for type of job, education, region and contract type, Black male graduates still earn less than their White peers, earning just over £7,000 less per annum in full time roles. That said, second or third generation immigrants tend to gain better qualifications and employment, likely because of the recognition of the UK education system, and fewer language and cultural barriers.

Whilst there’s no standard number or measurement of how much social mobility or downward mobility we want to see in the UK or elsewhere, it makes sense that we would want everyone to have an equal chance at a good job and fair pay, that suits their desires and way of living.

What constitutes an informed choice?

There are many different reasons people cite when asked why they ‘choose’ to be in insecure work. Zero hour contracts and shift work offer people a level of flexibility in the hours that they work that they are unlikely to find in more office-based roles. For employees that are care-givers, parents or disabled, this flexibility is key to allowing them to work at all. Whilst some people will have only ever accessed insecure work, the Social Mobility Commission has marked a growing trend of downward mobility, where people are leaving higher paid jobs and ending up in insecure work.

Whilst the Social Mobility Commission highlights that for some people this is a ‘choice’, a temporary move to make childcare easier whilst children are younger, it is impossible for us to quantify for how many people this is involuntary. When looking at the factors that cause involuntary downward mobility, we can see these as the same factors that limit social mobility, such as lack of access to education, racial discrimination, caring responsibilities and poverty. After all, for people who rely on flexible hours and do not have access to another option, is it fair to call this a choice?

Whilst flexible hours may be a draw for some, data from the Trades Union Congress (TUC), shows that that ‘flexibility’ is not always evenly shared for the benefit of both parties. Their survey highlights that fewer than one in three insecure workers said they had ever turned down hours offered to them, 43% said that they could decline hours but had never done so, and one in four said that they weren’t allowed to turn down hours. For Zero Hours contractors, the situation is worse, with a fifth of workers reporting that turning down hours had resulted in bullying and harassment from managers.

When zero hours is not enough

‍Zero hour contracts and shift work often makes up the bulk of insecure work, with other examples being low-paid insecure self-employment. Whether or not flexible working hours are a draw to these jobs, data shows that over two-thirds of people on zero hour contracts want to work more hours not fewer and people in part-time employment have a poverty rate 3 times that of full-time workers. In addition, contracts often don’t represent the accurate number of hours worked, which can lead to unpaid overtime, or issues accessing enough shifts.

‍For households where all adults are in partial employment, there is a stronger risk of in-work poverty. For a country where a child’s academic attainment is strongly linked to their parents socio-economic background, and where academic attainment can act as insulating factor against downward mobility, living in poverty can have lasting intergenerational effects.

‍ ‍

A ‘healthy’ work life balance?

Aside from unsociable or ad-hoc hours, can people in insecure work maintain good mental and physical health? Studies suggest that being in insecure work can be as bad for your mental health as being unemployed. In general, insecure work is associated with depression, exhaustion, anxiety, and self-reported ill health.

In the UK we have seen the number of disabled people joining the workforce growing, as well as a growing number of disabled and chronically-ill people of all ages post-pandemic (the number of disabled people of working age increased from 6.4 million in 2013 to 9.3 million in 2023). Data shows 1.45 million disabled people have found themselves pushed into insecure work.

This is also likely affected by Government schemes to review fit-note procedures as well as access to benefits relying on job seeking activities, pushing disabled people into the workforce. However schemes like this do not take into account the quality of employment, and potentially just push and already vulnerable section of society into insecure employment, compounding poor mental and physical health outcomes.

‍A varying picture regionally

It’s not just your parent’s socio-economic background that can affect your chances of social mobility, where you’re from in the UK can also be a mitigating factor. Areas of disadvantage, particularly areas that used to rely on mining and manufacturing, are the least likely to see upward social mobility, especially for people with working class backgrounds. In general, the closer you live to London and the Home Counties, the more likely you are to see long-term social mobility (50%) compared to other areas of the UK (31%).

How could Living Hours help?

Living Hours has three simple principles: