Does this job advert facilitate social mobility or is it just another type of snobbery?

[dabbling]

I saw this "must have" criterion in an advert for a summer internship at a well known financial institution. They also need to be "currently attending or have an offer to start university from September 2024 in any degree or discipline."

The Social Mobility Commission may believe that turning the children of plumbers and electricians etc into "white-collar workers" in the financial sector is positively contributing to social mobility, but are they right? We need good innovative brains in our trades too. Skilled workers often earn more than university graduates, and usually have less debt. I think I'd rather see the SMC raising the profile of skilled trades rather than propping up the myth that they are less worthy.

YABU. It is not denigrating those jobs, it is a short hand for working class and is often used to as a qualifiyer for social mobility programmes for those from working class backgrounds who wish to move in to traditionally middle class dominated professions like financial services.

My workplace runs a similar scheme to encourage under represented groups to take up degree level apprenticeships and free school meals and/or a similar categories of parent's jobs are used a eligibility criteria.

There is also a recognition that employing staff from a range of backgrounds and perspectives helps the organisation.

The Social Mobility Commission was originally set up to tackle child poverty, but it seems to have morphed into something else. I can't see any sense in lumping the children of skilled tradesmen into the same box as children of the long-term unemployed.

Its about mobility/change.

The point of the criterion is that every year, the childrem of lawyers and bankers, teachers, accountants, engineers etc, tend to fill most of the highest paying graduate entry roles. They would like to see more people from more diverse backgrounds.

It is not denigrating those jobs, it is a short hand for working class

There are two contradictory clauses in that sentence!

I am in one of those categories (my dad is a tenant farmer with no formal qualifications) and don't feel offended on my or his behalf. He does a very important and skilled job but it is true that the middle class profession I am in now is harder to crack and succeed in for people like me.

It is not about saying manual jobs aren't valuable, but ensuring that people from those backgrounds have a chance to get in to and succeed in traditionally middle class professions if that is what they want to do.

It seems like it's some kind of initiative sponsored by the financial services industry. So it's just a recruitment drive but trying to be woke. The degree pathway is still seen as the traditional middle class way forward. I think they need to move away from that. The brightest kids are never encouraged enough into construction trades and associated professions. Much more valuable as careers in my view than being a banker.

This is a worthy goal and I'm not sure the categories are worth quibbling over. Diversity in any workplace is enriching to everyone and young people should be encouraged to look outside the occupations which are easier for them to access due to their socio economic background.

It's not about saying one career route is better than the other, but more ensuring people have full knowledge of what is out there and a chance to choose the best career pathway for them.

Oh for goodness sake, it's meant to encourage people who might not think it's a job that someone from their circumstances can apply for rather than anything else. Believe me, most grads / higher apprentices staring at professional service firms are still middle class, don't worry.
And FFS it's definitely not woke, why is everything now woke

Everywhere is doing this kind of thing (eg professional services, consulting, civil service).

More initiatives to encourage diversity. Is that such a bad thing.

Exactly! And it is nice to see class finally being considered as something that is as much (or often more IMO) a challenge as race, sexuality and sex to progression in certain workplaces and professions.

What do you mean by this?

It’s not that complex. It’s trying to vary the type of young person who goes into particular fields so that it is not only the children of lawyers and bankers who end up going into the prestigious graduate entry schemes. No one is preventing those school-leavers from training as plumbers or electricians. The ones they’re targeting are already going to university.

Also, the scheme also specifies the children of low-paid manual/ service/ routine jobs like bar staff, waiters etc — as the child of a binman and a cleaner, I can tell you that watching the physical toll taken on two now elderly people by a lifetime of physically demanding jobs is wretched. Giving people more choices than their parents is always good.

Is it because a lot of interns for these finance programs are often from similar backgrounds, so they’re trying to encourage students from other backgrounds to get their foot in the door? I don’t think that’s necessarily a bad thing. I used to help do admin for a popular internship at a large charity and the shortlisted applicants were all brilliant - privately educated, great university places, often volunteering/extra curriculars - but all very similar, and very few working class students in the mix. And the ones that actually get the internships like these will be so few it’s not like there will be a mass change at once leaving the trades with no bodies.

There's always exceptions to the rule but usually families of traditionally working class trades are less likely to go to university or be encouraged to go to uni.

My family are all working class trades. They were terrified when I talked about university - mainly panicking about the costs and how they would afford it (before they even talked to anyone or did any research). There was almost an intrinsic fear that it's only familys of doctors and lawyers etc go to uni, fear of the unknown.

They were super proud in the end but there is still prejudice in working class about a university education and is it worth it

Those categories have been around for years in almost that exact wording. I’m sure it might have been part of my uni applications and it was definitely asked when I applied for the Civil Service Fast Stream. I’m 32 now for reference.

I wasn’t offended by them at all. In fact, I hoped it might improved my chances ha! My dad was a builder. Self-employed. But didn’t run a company so certainly wasn’t well-off. I got the maximum amount of student loan based on household income.

I liked seeing these questions because I felt welcome to apply. I was the first in my family to go to uni and my parents didn’t really understand why I would want to go, let alone how to support me finding a good job/profession afterwards.

I think they realise now uni was very good for me, but at the time they thought I shouldn’t go as it wasn’t for people like us. Surely I would just get myself an admin role at a local company, despite getting AAA at A-Level.

Indeed. Working class people like us may not have parents with the knowledge or contacts to support us in to those types of careers. My dad was super proud that I went to university but he didn't really know how to support me. I went to all the interviews on my own, filled out my own UCAS form and he gave me £200 in cash on my first day and that was it.

I didn't really know about internships and work experience, I spent my holidays working hospitality and tourism jobs simply to pay off my overdraft. Similarly when I graduated I didn't really know about graduate schemes, I just needed to work as soon as I left. I applied for Civil Service Fast Stream but got cold feet and quit the process before the end because the impression was it was not for people like me. I did a number of jobs in my twenties and ended up in a decent policy career by a circuitous route. However my career is definitely is not a advanced or good as my more middle class peers who knew how to play the game early on.

Surely only if you think working class is a derogatory category?

It's a scheme specifically targeted at young people who are usually underrepresented in these schemes. There will be plenty of internship places for children of parents in similar professions, but the children of working class families may not even think to apply, which is why schemes like this exist, to specifically target them.

I went to a summer school scheme thing at a university when I was 17 for children of parents without university education. It was great and I think these schemes are really good.

Household income is easy to fiddle when you're self-employed. DH and his siblings both got the full loan - dad was a self-employed farm technician, mum retired (from being a TA part-time).
Certainly 'well-off' by most people's standards. Nice big house, decent food, the moment the kids went off to uni they went on Caribbean cruises :)

I have no issues with diversity but as a foreigner I'll never understand the class system. Quite a few of those professions earn more than your average civil servant and pay very little income tax.

I do understand that MC professions might once have been seen as the gold standard, financial services obviously pays an obscene amount and is worth pursuing but really it's one of the few. Wages are stagnating, while tradies can charge whatever they like, people will still need things fixed.

Many of you are perpetuating class snobbery - the idea that a skilled trade is "working class" i.e. lower in status, than a finance job that is "middle class".

This particular internship is not particularly well paid compared to many financial services internships I've seen (£21k pa versus £30k plus) so isn't guaranteed to lead to a job that pays more than someone with a skilled trade.

They'd be better off stating 'first in family' to go to university instead of listing specific professions.
Funnily enough one of my former bosses quit her job to run a bar with her husband. They don't ask for detailed evidence or interrogate them, so the kids aren't' exactly lying if they applied for this and put their parents down as 'bar staff'.
Especially with older parents I also know a few who are retired, work PT as sales assistant etc when their kids are going to uni, also in this category.

I think they need to widen their examples to specify some more occupations that also have significant numbers of workers from other ethnicities, such as care worker & nursery staff.

But it's a good idea, even if it requires the young person to have already made it past the applying to university stage, as that's a major hurdle that kids don't always get past.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that trade professions are "lower value" etc. However I can absolutely confirm that there is a lack of representation of children whose parents do those roles in professional service firms. It's indisputably a career where most people have parents who have undertaken "professional" roles themselves.

Incidentally, I do find that most people who go on and on about how valued trade professions are, and how we are all woke for looking to encourage social mobility, tend to think that it's other people's children who should be encouraged to enter those trade professions rather than their own children (who of course are far too bright and talented to undertake those roles themselves).

The misunderstanding is yours. ‘Working class’ isn’t a denigrating term.

And it has little to do with money. People are well aware that trades jobs can be very remunerative. Working-class people can be rich, and remain working-class. I would class myself as ‘educated working-class’ — child of a binman and cleaner, first in family to stay in school past 14, have four degrees and am an academic. Our plumber certainly earns more than I do, but I never wanted to be a plumber.

surely the point is that the internship is designed for those who are not the offspring of investment bankers.
Something that both the children of tradespeople or the long term unemployed have in common

Well my dad wasn’t fiddling his, so please don’t cast assumptions! The only holidays I had growing up were in a caravan every few years. My parents are now looking to retire on state pension alone. There will be no luxury holidays for them. They won’t even afford a caravan holiday. No savings.

Yes, your plumbers and your electricians can earn well. But other trades like bricklayer, labourer etc don’t earn nearly as much. Especially if you just work on sites for national house builders. Not doing private work.