Protesting at wages less than £500 a week!

[chem1st]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-14529442

 

The railwaymen's strike had started on the afternoon of Thursday 17 August 1911, in protest at average wages of £1 per week.

 

These were around 20% below the norm for skilled manual workers at the time.

 

Current data is only available till 2010. In 2010, the relative worth of £1 0s 0d from 1911 is:

 

£79.00

using the retail price index

 

£99.70

using the GDP deflator

 

* Using average earnings.

 

£476.00

using the per capita GDP

 

£653.00

using the share of GDP

 

If it wasn't for the increased inequality today, workers could expect a salary of £500/week.

 

Granted lifestyles wil be twice as good today when you consider inflation adjusted RPI vs 1911. However technological development would allow for poor people of today to be living a lifestyle 5 times greater than those in 1911, if it wasn't for the increased inequality.

[quisquose]

Railwaymen are now earning considerably more than an average wage.

[Longcol]

Railwaymen are now earning considerably more than an average wage.

 

I think the term "railwaymen" in the OP is so vague it is meaningless anyway - people working on the railways could have included drivers, firemen, signalmen, guards, stationmasters, porters etc - all on different pay rates.

[quisquose]

I think the term "railwaymen" in the OP is so vague it is meaningless anyway - people working on the railways could have included drivers, firemen, signalmen, guards, stationmasters, porters etc - all on different pay rates.

 

I thought that as soon as I typed it.

 

I was thinking drivers though, since my dad was one and so was his dad, as well as many other family members. My dad's salary was definitely in the region of average.

 

After he retired came privatisation, too many redundancies, insufficient training, and then demand exceeding supply which has taken salaries some 50% above average.

 

My dad is quite bitter about it tbh.

[Ms Macbeth]

We could look at lots of jobs and see how the pay differentiates over the last 100 years. My father was born in 1904 and left school at 17 and became a mercantile clerk. That was considered a decent job because of the levels of literacy and numeracy required, and was paid better than most skilled manual trades which started with apprenticeships at 14. White collar jobs were very sought after in those days.

 

Clerical jobs nowadays are not well paid, their main worth is that they can provide entry to other jobs within companies. But to work as a clerk nowadays usually means less than average pay.

 

All sorts of jobs have had good and bad times, its swings and roundabouts IMO.

 

I can remember when councillors were volunteers, who only got expenses. Now people make a career out of local politics. I'm sure we could all add more to the list.

[HeadingNorth]

I think the term "railwaymen" in the OP is so vague it is meaningless anyway - people working on the railways could have included drivers, firemen, signalmen, guards, stationmasters, porters etc - all on different pay rates.

 

It would also include people such as my father who worked as a tapper - walking along the railway lines and tapping the wooden sleepers to see if any of them sounded rotten.

 

Jobs like that simply no longer exist, but when they did, they were exceedingly low paid.

[chem1st]

We could look at lots of jobs and see how the pay differentiates over the last 100 years. My father was born in 1904 and left school at 17 and became a mercantile clerk. That was considered a decent job because of the levels of literacy and numeracy required, and was paid better than most skilled manual trades which started with apprenticeships at 14. White collar jobs were very sought after in those days.

 

Clerical jobs nowadays are not well paid, their main worth is that they can provide entry to other jobs within companies. But to work as a clerk nowadays usually means less than average pay.

 

All sorts of jobs have had good and bad times, its swings and roundabouts IMO.

 

I can remember when councillors were volunteers, who only got expenses. Now people make a career out of local politics. I'm sure we could all add more to the list.

 

But when we consider income inequality and the social ills that it brings, we see that wages are totally out of kilter, and society is suffering.

[HeadingNorth]

But when we consider income inequality and the social ills that it brings, we see that wages are totally out of kilter, and society is suffering.

 

You're assuming the conclusion. By positing that income equality brings social ills, you conclude that income equality brings social ills.

 

 

In fact, many of the most prosperous and happiest societies in the world have very large disparities in income. (And many others don't.)

[SiSiSi]

Does anyone know what the average weekly wage actually is?

[HeadingNorth]

Does anyone know what the average weekly wage actually is?

 

As of 2004, the mean wage in Britain was £456 per week; the median income (the halfway point between highest and lowest wage if you list them all in order) was £328 per week.

 

Official government figures tend to be several years behind current events.