In the early 1990s, Fiona Devine revisited Luton to see if the 'privatized instrumentalism' identified in the 1960s still held true in a different economic climate.
Devine found that workers were not as privatized as previously suggested; they still maintained strong links with extended kin and neighbors for practical and emotional support.
Her research indicated that affluent workers remained critical of social inequality and capitalism, suggesting that working-class values of solidarity had not been entirely replaced by individualism.
| Feature | Traditional Working Class | Affluent Working Class | Middle Class |
|---|---|---|---|
| Work View | Source of community/identity | Instrumental (means to money) | Career-oriented/Status |
| Social Life | Community-centered (Pubs/Clubs) | Home-centered (Privatized) | Individualistic/Social networks |
| Unionism | Solidaristic (Brotherhood) | Instrumental (Pay-focused) | Professional associations |
| Politics | Ideological Labour support | Pragmatic/Instrumental support | Conservative/Liberal leaning |
Distinguish between Income and Class: Always emphasize that having a high income (affluence) does not automatically change a person's social class or cultural values.
The 'New' Working Class: Be prepared to explain that Goldthorpe and Lockwood didn't say workers stayed the same; they argued a 'new' type of working class emerged that was neither traditional nor middle class.
Compare and Contrast: Use Devine's study to provide a contemporary critique of the original Luton study, showing how social values can persist even through economic changes.
Avoid Over-generalization: Do not assume all manual workers are 'affluent'; the studies specifically focused on high-wage sectors like car manufacturing.