Examining Inequality in the UK - Essay Example

Examining Inequality in the UK Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Name Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Course Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Lecture Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 9th March, 2012. The UK has a liberal Constitution which through statutes, convention and customs grants all citizens equal rights; this however does not mean every citizen is guaranteed equal rights. A liberal democracy is supposed to ensure people enjoy their citizenship rights as long as they don’t interfere with the rights of others (Habermas 1996, pp.61). Citizens of a liberal democracy should have equal to opportunities to attain the highest potential. Government decisions in a liberal democracy should be inclusive of all citizens and should be made for the benefit of all. Unfortunately the UK lags far behind in realizing these principles of liberal democracy (Hills 2004, pp. 136). Burgess (Wilson and Worth) (2009, p. 2) assert; ‘Britain is an unequal country, more so than many other industrialized countries and more so than it was a generation ago’. These inequalities are reflected in everyday life in the UK, mostly associated with an individual’s characteristics. The characteristics that influence social inequality include gender, age, race, disability, sexual orientation and occupation. The struggle for equal rights for all citizens can be traced to the early years of the British monarch; Robin Hood of Locksley is known to have stolen from rich noble land owners and split the among poor peasant farmers (Hills 2004, pp 138). Before the Industrial revolution thousands of Britons migrated to new lands to found new societies where they had land ownership rights. These migrants were later the founders of New States like Canada and the United States which later incorporated Bills of rights in their constitution (Berthoud 2007, pp. 126). The American Civil War was fought over the rights of slaves, where the some states professed the belief that they owned Black Slaves had no rights while the other group maintained that black people were human and were entitled only to the most basic rights. In the 1950s and 1960 witnessed the beginning of the civil rights movement in the United States. The movement was aimed at attaining equal basic legal rights for the black minority. The movement also strived for the realization of a country where all are equal before the law. The movement was championed by individuals disgusted by the existing government policy that did not acknowledge the sovereign rights of people of black origin (Sefton, Hills and Sutherland 2009, pp.56). In August 1963 Martin Luther King Jr a prominent crusader for equal rights in the now famous speech ‘I have a dream speech’ asserted; ‘I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character’ (Amar 1998, pp.23). This famous speech set the tone for future struggles to realize equality for all in the rest of the world. The UK as liberal state has gone though several stages of liberalism. Initially liberalism was conceived as a principle where rational people can make decisions that are for the benefit of all and everyone can cater for themselves, however this was not the case (Waldfogel and Washbrook 2008, pp. 21). This form of Liberalism allowed for some people to take advantage of others leading to inequalities. In the early 20th century the government introduced pensions and sickness benefits to try and level out inequalities. Neo-liberalism propagated by Margret Thatcher meant a return to free market economies that consequently reflects the UK’s unequal society (Hills 2004, pp. 27). Socialism was a response to the evils of capitalist society; it was propagated by Karl Marx. Socialism advocated for an equal society, governed by the working class, it urged a shift from a society run by wealthy aristocrats aimed at amassing wealth and power to a society where individuals work collectively for the benefit of all. In the early and mid 1990’s political revolutionaries in Russia would spring up and try to implement Marx’s form of socialism in a new political order called communism, which would become unworkable and extinct in less than 50 years. Today the British labour party maintains some of Karl Marx’s principle but in a more watered down form. Being free and equal citizens of a country entails having a legal guarantee to full involvement in public dialogue and in public decision making. Dworkin asserts ‘A citizen has the right to an equal voice and an equal vote. In addition, she has rights needed to protect her “moral independence” that is the ability to decide for herself what gives meaning and value to her life and to take responsibility for living in conformity with her values ‘ . According to (Habermas 1996) Citizenship assumes two dimensions: public autonomy is concerned with involvement in forming public opinion and making collective decision, while private autonomy is concerned with an individual’s right to self determination. In a society like the UK that guarantees equal rights for all citizens, discrimination is supposed to be extinct. However those who propagate the ideology of social justice argue that to have a stable society free of discrimination the right of citizens should extend to include right to peace, democracy, development and social justice (Toynbee and Walker,1998) . Social justice movements work towards the realization of a socially just world where all people have equal basic rights and access to benefits of their society regardless of an individual’s background or procedural justice. To fully examine inequalities with the UK as a subject, one has to analyze the individual characteristics that shape citizens access to equal rights. This paper explores gender, age, ethnicity and religious affiliation, disability status, sexual orientation, occupational and social class and social background. The UK has achieved equality for women in education, a significant victory in the fight against inequality in a male dominated world. Girls at age 16 now have a higher educational outcome than their male age mates (Goodman, Sibieta & Washbrook, 2009, pp.14). The further show that in all groups under age 44, more women have higher educational qualification than men, unlike older age groups. The inequality between wages for men and women can be owed to career progress lost while raising a first child. Even though women have higher educational qualification they still get paid lesser than men (Longhi and Platt, 2008 pp.243). Ethnicity is the second characteristics associating an individual to discrimination this essay examined. According to the Longhi and Platt an educational comparison of Pakistani, Black African and boys of Black Caribbean and those of White British origin at age 16, reveals that their educational grades are below the national average (pp.45). As Affirmative action Children from minority groups with grades below the national average are more likely to precede for higher education than their White British counterparts with the very same (Goodman, Sibieta & Washbrook 2009, pp.12). Minority groups however access lower quality higher education and a less likely to attain higher academic honors. Inequality in employment is reflected by lower employment rates of minority groups below those of either white British Males or Females (Longhi & Platt 2008, pp.26). More than 40 percent of Pakistani women are dormant on the labor marketing, culturally required to stay at home as housekeepers. Statistics quote the number of White British, other white and Indian men in paid employment at 80% while other minorities range between 60 and 70 per cent (Longhi & Platt 2008, pp.23). In some immigrant groups unemployment disparity is equal to those who were born outside the UK (Berthoud 2007, pp. 56). The National Equality panel asserts that; ‘When employed, nearly all other groups have hourly pay less than White British men’ Disability status is a factor that influences a citizen’s ability to enjoy rights due to him by virtue of being a citizen of the United Kingdom. Disability in the educational context is divided into two broad categories; Special Educational Needs and Additional Support Needs. Pupils afflicted by sensory and/or physical impairments, have higher school attainment directly proportional to their primary school attainment (Goodman, Sibieta and Washbrook 2009, pp.23). However pupils with Behavioral and Emotional Support Needs record deteriorated scores. In employment disparities between those with a work limiting disability and able workers are big. In contrast, those classified as disabled by the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) have lesser employment and remuneration gap (Longhi and Platt 2008, pp.14). Half of people with disability have low or no employable skill and have half the employment rate of those without disability (Berthoud 2007 pp.67). Even when employed, disabled people earn less per hour than their able-bodied counterparts. In recent years the debate of whether couples in same sex relationship have a right to enjoy basic citizen’s right has taken centre stage. Discrimination against this group is related to whether or not they choose to reveal information on their status (Whittle, Turner and Al-Alami 2007, pp. 167). Those males who report same sex unions in their CVs are less likely to be called for an interview and are paid lesser when employed than other men. Longhi & Platt 2008 concluded that income spread for gays, lesbians or bisexual people was similar to those of the wider population (pp. 23). Discrimination based on age is reflected in the income difference of young people below 25 years compared to older people. Income of young people has declined in the last ten years widening the gap between their net earnings and those of the older generation. Women of age 25 and above have closed the gap on their male counterparts and on average women now earn more compared to 10 years ago (Longhi & Platt 2008,pp. 12). Britain is viewed as a society with a deeply rooted social class system; in earlier centuries class division was based on fiefdom society where the noble and loyal owned land rights while peasants and other groups worked for them and paid taxes to the noble to have access to land. In recent years social inequality is shown in occupational inequalities (Longhi &Platt 2008, pp.33). In the UK the levels of qualification, employment, earnings and incomes have a large variance (Berthoud 2007, pp 125). The Average hourly rate for adult men working in managerial and professional occupations is 80% per cent higher than those in operational occupations. Women in lower occupation are paid 2.9 times lower than those in executive and managerial jobs. Families whose income is from executive and managerial occupations have 80 per cent higher income than those in operational occupations (Abrams and Houston 2006, pp.12). Whether or not child receives Free School Meals is used to indicate the child’s social-economic background. In England half of the boys recipient of free school meals, aged 16 scored results in the bottom quarter of their class, those in Wales were worse with only half above bottom fifth (Goodman, Sibieta & Washbrook 2009, pp.27) . Larger disparities in secondary school results were found in boys on free school meals from certain ethnic minorities (Adam and Browne 2009, pp.13).By age 16 boys White British, Black Caribbean and mixed White and Black Caribbean parentage had the lowest assessment scores of any ethnicity, gender of free Meal status category. However the inequality in GCSE attainment attributable to social class has reduced significantly in the last few years (Burgess, Wilson & Worth 2009, pp.320) Income levels are one of the contributing factors that may bar once achievement of higher educational qualification in life. Students from disadvantages backgrounds formerly on the Free Meal program have a lower chance of going to university than those from wealthier backgrounds with the same results (Longhi & Platt 2008, pp.13).When people from poor background make it to university, they are likely to go to less prestigious ones, consequently receiving lower quality degree attainments (Burgess, , Wilson & Worth 2009, pp.67) Former students of prestigious boarding schools earn 8 per cent more than others of the same gender, ethnicity, social class, qualification, industry and employment region who attended public schools(Longhi & Platt 2008, pp.13). In recent years people brought up in social housing were found to live lower quality adult life than those in previous generations. The kind of house on lives in reflects two aspects of inequality in the UK: first, it influences the future adult life of the occupant and is also a reflection of other inequalities they go through in their lives. Access to owning a good housing depends on ones creditworthiness and help (Longhi & Platt 2008, pp.12). More than 50 per cent of occupants of social housing have little or no job professional qualification, while only 4 per cent have university qualification. Less than half of adult men and women living in social housing are not in paid employment in comparison those who own mortgages have 89 and 81 per cent employment rates for men and women respectively. Female social tenants receive a median hourly wage that is grouped in the lower quarter of overall, while that of male holders of mortgages are in the upper quartile . More than a quarter of social housing tenants have incomes lower than the national average before deduction of housing costs, in contrast with only 20 per cent mortgage holders. These income inequalities have consequently resulted in lower household, financial and physical wealth for social tenants compared to mortgage (Longhi & Platt 2008, pp.15). The United Kingdom comprises of Ireland, Wales, Scotland and England, levels of inequalities and their outcomes are slightly above those of England. The trends for outcomes of most inequalities remain the same even with integration of equality laws in the Scottish and Welsh National assembly (Sefton 2005, pp.89). Scotland has made a little progress in addressing inequality and levels of income have gone down by a slight margin. Social policy are policies developed by governments to ensure that all its citizens enjoy equal rights. These policies addresses social inequalities and tries to attain a state of meritocracy. It is aimed at shaping the distribution and benefits of resources available in that society (Sefton, Hills and Sutherland 2009, pp.126). Social policies seek to address the following aspects of the well being of the society: Unemployment, security, environment, healthcare, child protection, social exclusion, education, and housing. Ignorance in the UK is the main barrier in implementing policies aimed at combating inequalities. The UK has tried to address housing tenure inequality issues by discouraging building of social council houses since 1979. The government since 1977 proposed the right to buy policy for tenants of council houses; in 1980 the Housing Act was passed allowing tenants to move to owner status (Sefton, Hills and Sutherland 2009, pp.56).. The houses went at discounted prices to encourage more tenants to join the scheme. More than 2 million houses were acquired by their tenants in the last two decades (Sefton, Hills & Sutherland 2009, pp.89). The labour Party opposed this acquisition scheme and indeed the Government of Tony Blair reduced the discount offered by councils to tenants buy their houses. Many attribute the inequalities trends between social tenant and mortgage holders/owners to this move by the Labour Government. In 2011 David Cameron speaking at the Conservative party conference proposed to lower prices of houses in under the Right to Buy scheme (Sefton, T. 2005). The British Government since 1870 has tried to address inequality outcomes related to the education dimension when they made primary education free, later in 1944 the Education act was legislated introducing free primary education. Comprehensive (non-selective) was adopted as official government policy in1960. Comprehensive education policy was aimed at reducing discrimination on grounds of class, ethnicity and gender (Toynbee and Walker 2008). Its critic’s argue a selective policy is better positioned to cater for the needs of disadvantaged groups. Reforms in education aimed at ironing out inequalities have been implemented over the years, these reforms include: Centralization; a national curriculum was introduced between 1980 and 1990. Assessment by outcomes shifted focus from educational processes to targets and performance criteria. Initiatives allow for earmarked funding aimed at encouraging greater inclusion and more employment opportunities for disadvantaged groups. Conclusion In terms of social mobility the UK is far from achieving the principle of a meritocratic society. Inequality in the UK is widespread and is deeply rooted in the social fabric of the British society. Among developing countries the UK is where your ethnic and socio-economic background is the most significant indicator of your economic and social status. Intergenerational mobility rates in Britain are far below the international average for both men and women People who are victims of these inequalities still find it hard to move up the social ladder due to the gap in resources needed for their next generation to be more upwardly mobile. Bibliographies Adam, S. and Browne, J. 2009. Redistribution, work incentives and thirty years of tax and benefit reform in the UK. IFS Working Paper, London: Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS). Berthoud, R. 2007. Work-rich and work-poor: three decades of change. York: Joseph Rowntree Foundation. Burgess, S., Wilson, D. and Worth, J. 2009. An investigation of educational outcomes by ethnicity and religion. Report for the National Equality Panel. Goodman, A., Sibieta, L. and Washbrook, E. 2009 Inequalities in educational outcomes among children aged 3 to 16. Research Report for the National Equality Panel, London: IFS. Hills, J. 2004. Inequality and the State. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Longhi, S. and Platt, L. 2008. An analysis of pay gaps and pay penalties by sex, ethnicity, religion, disability, sexual orientation and age using the Labour Force Survey. EHRC Research Report 9, London: EHRC. Sefton, T . 2005 ‘Give and take: attitudes to redistribution’, in A Park, J Curtis K Thomason, C Bromley, M Phillips and M Johnson (eds) British Social Attitudes: the 22nd report: Two Terms of New Labour, The Public’s Reaction. Aldershot: Ashgate. Sefton, T., Hills, J. and Sutherland, H. 2009. ‘Poverty, inequality and redistribution’, in J Hills, T Sefton and K Stewart (eds) Towards a More Equal Society? Poverty, inequality and policy since1997. Bristol: The Policy Press. Toynbee, P. and Walker, D. 2008. Unjust Rewards. London: Granta Books. Waldfogel, J. and Washbrook, E.2008. ‘Early years policy’, paper presented at Carnegie Habermas, J. 1996. “Citizenship and National Identity,” in Between Facts and Norms. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp. 491-515. Amar. A. Reed. 1998. The Bill of Rights. New Haven: Yale University Press. Abrams, D. and Houston, D.M. 2006. Equalities, Diversity and Prejudice in Britain: 2005 National Survey, London; Equalities Review. Whittle, S., Turner, L. and Al-Alami, M. 2007. Engendered Penalties: transgender and transsexual people’sexperiences of inequality and discrimination, London: Equalities Review, Press for Change, and Manchester Metropolitan University. Read More