Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Higher managerial and professional occupations are now the most incentivized occupational class in Britain. It is not yet known whether the rise in pay for performance (PFP) signifies an erosion or enhancement in the ‘service relationship’ that purportedly characterizes these occupations. Taking an occupational class perspective, this article investigates the implications of the rise in PFP for the employment relationship and conditions of work across the occupational structure using two nationally representative datasets. In fixed-effects estimates, PFP is found to heavily substitute base earnings in non-service class occupations, but not in service class occupations. PFP jobs generally have no worse conditions relative to non-PFP jobs within occupational classes. The article concludes the rise in PFP should be conceptualized more as a form of ‘rent sharing’ for service class occupations, enhancing the service relationship, and as a form of ‘risk sharing’ for non-service class occupations.

Keywords

earnings employment relationships Goldthorpe model occupational class pay for performance

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Akerlof

(1982) Labor contracts as partial gift exchange. Quarterly Journal of Economics 97(4): 543–569.

Breen

(1997) Risk, recommodification and stratification. European Sociological Review 31(3): 473–489.

Bryan

Bryson

(2016) Has performance pay increased wage inequality in Britain? Labour Economics 41: 149–161.

Bryson

Forth

Stokes

(2014) The performance pay premium: how big is it and does it affect wage dispersion? IZA Discussion Paper no. 8360. Available at: http://ftp.iza.org/dp8360.pdf (accessed 4 April 2019).

Bryson

Freeman

Lucifora

(2013) Part II, Chapter 6. Performance Pay and Financial Participation. In: Boeri

Lucifora

Murphy

(eds) Executive Remuneration and Employee Performance-Related Pay. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 138–170.

Cousins

Khan

Mears

(2018) Theoretical and methodological pathways for research on elites. Socio-Economic Review 16(2): 225–249.

Cushen

Thompson

(2016) Financialization and value: why labour and the labour process still matter. Work, Employment and Society 30(2): 352–365.

DiPrete

Eirich

Pittinsky

(2010) Compensation benchmarking, leapfrogs, and the surge in executive pay. American Journal of Sociology 115(6): 1671–1712.

Evans

Mills

(1998) Identifying class structure: a latent class analysis of the criterion-related and construct validity of the Goldthorpe class schema. European Sociological Review 14(1): 87–106.

10.

Evans

Mills

(2000) In search of the wage-labour/service contract: new evidence on the validity of the Goldthorpe class schema. British Journal of Sociology 51(4): 641–661.

11.

Felstead

Gallie

Green

(eds) (2015) Unequal Britain and Work. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

12.

Felstead

Gallie

Green

, et al. (2014) Skills and Employment Surveys Series Dataset, 1986, 1992, 1997, 2001, 2006 and 2012 [data collection], 2nd Edition. UK Data Service, SN: 7467. Available at: http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-7467-2 (accessed 4 April 2019).

13.

Forth

Bryson

Stokes

(2016) Are firms paying more for performance? International Journal of Manpower 37(22): 323–343.

14.

Freeman

(2010) It’s financialization! International Labor Review 149(2): 163–183.

15.

Gallie

Felstead

Green

, et al. (2017) The hidden face of job insecurity. Work, Employment and Society 31(1): 36–53.

16.

Gallie

White

Cheng

, et al. (1998) Restructuring the Employment Relationship. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

17.

Goldthorpe

(2007) Social class and the differentiation of employment contracts. In: Goldthorpe

(ed.) On Sociology, Vol. 2: Illustration and Retrospect. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 101–124.

18.

Green

Heywood

(2017) Don’t forget the gravy! Are bonuses just added on top of salaries? Industrial Relations 55(3): 490–513.

19.

Kim

Kogut

Yang

J-S

(2015) Executive compensation, fat cats, and best athletes. American Sociological Review 80(2): 299–328.

20.

Lallement

(2011) Europe and the economic crisis: forms of labour market adjustment and varieties of capitalism. Work, Employment and Society 25(4): 627–641.

21.

McGovern

Hills

Mills

, et al. (2007) Market, Class and Employment. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

22.

Milgrom

Roberts

(1992) Economics, Organization and Management. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall International.

23.

Office for National Statistics (ONS) (2016) Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, 1997–2015: Secure Access [data collection], 8th Edition. UK Data Service, SN: 6689. Available at: http://doi.org/10.5255/UKDA-SN-6689-7 (accessed 4 April 2019).

24.

Piketty

(2014) Capital in the Twenty-First Century. London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

25.

Rose

Pevalin

(2005) The National Statistics Socio-Economic Classification: Origins, Development and Use. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

26.

Stokes

Bryson

Forth

, et al. (2017) Who fared better? The fortunes of performance pay and fixed pay workers through recession. British Journal of Industrial Relations 55(4): 778–801.

27.

Thompson

(2013) Financialization and the workplace: extending and applying the disconnected capitalism thesis. Work, Employment and Society 27(3): 472–488.

28.

Vidal

(2013) Postfordism as a dysfunctional accumulation regime: a comparative analysis of the USA, the UK and Germany. Work, Employment and Society 27(3): 451–471.

29.

Warren

(2015) Work-time underemployment and financial hardship: class inequalities and recession in the UK. Work, Employment and Society 29(2): 191–212.

30.

Warren

Lyonette

(2018) Good, bad and very bad part-time jobs for women? Re-examining the importance of occupational class for job quality since the ‘Great Recession’ in Britain. Work, Employment and Society 32(4): 747–767.

31.

White

Hill

Smeaton

, et al. (2004) Managing to Change? British Workplaces and the Future of Work. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

32.

Williams

(2017a) An old model of social class? Job characteristics and the NS-SEC schema. Work, Employment and Society 31(1): 153–165.

33.

Williams

(2017b) Occupational stratification in contemporary Britain: occupational class and the wage structure in the wake of the great recession. Sociology 51(6): 1299–1317.

34.

Williams

Zhou

(2016) Paying for performance in Britain: does the type of job matter? In: CIPD applied research conference. Available at: https://www.cipd.co.uk/Images/paying-for-performance-in-Britain_2016-does-the-type-of-job-matter_tcm18-20006.pdf (accessed 4 April 2019).

35.

Williams

Zhou

Zou

(2019) Differentiation in compensation systems within organizations: an occupational approach. Quality of Working Life Research Cluster Working Paper, January, Surrey Business School, University of Surrey, Guildford.

36.

Zou

(2015) Employment relations and social stratification in contemporary urban China: does Goldthorpe’s class theory still work? Sociology 49(6): 1133–1150.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.28 MB

The Rise in Pay for Performance Among Higher Managerial and Professional Occupations in Britain: Eroding or Enhancing the Service Relationship?

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material