Labor Conditions

Inequality

Inequality had been a significant concern during the historical periods, especially during the moments when agriculture and industrial production was gaining momentum in Europe. During the 1700s and 1800s, the labor conditions among the agricultural and factory workers in Britain were one of the worst as the massive exploitation was experienced (“Mobilizing Industrial Labor”). The nature of employment had been determined by the desire for high production in the main plantations rather than respect for human rights. In this regard, the labor conditions among the industrial and agricultural workers can be described as exploitative since it undermined the freedoms and rights, which individuals had been entitled. The labor circumstances signified massive disparities among the industrialists and the subjects as the former ones focused on profits at the expense of the latter.

One of the factors that defined the labor conditions in Britain in the late 1700s and the 1800s was the long working hours. Ideally, during the industrial revolution, the non-mechanized production had been still widely used (“Mobilizing Industrial Labor”). With the demand for industrial goods increasing throughout Europe and the rest of the world, there was a need for more production. As a result, the workers in the major factory centers and the farms had been working long hours to maintain production. The agricultural and factory employees had been engaged amidst the beatings they received whenever production declined. One of the areas that heavily employed human labor was cotton production and manufacturing. The laborers worked each day picking cotton and in the production centers, which caused depression and death.

Besides, labor conditions among the agricultural and factory employees in the country were poor as the laborers were paid little earnings and subjected to harsh treatment. During the time, there were no organized trade unions to protect their rights (‘Mobilizing Industrial Labor”). Thus, the employers in the agricultural and factory centers paid workers whatever they thought was appropriate for them. It gave room for wage exploitation. In other instances, the workers had to endure unpaid months as the employers had the discretion not to pay them. They also penalized employees due to minor issues. The employers exercised arbitrary and forced termination of contracts as a way of building discipline among them. For example, in 1823, the Master and Servant Act was passed. It allowed employers to send workers to the house of correction where they were held under hard labor conditions for breaching labor agreements. The situation was dire that they could not be able to support their families and had to live on the farms provided by the employers.

Furthermore, labor conditions among the factory and agricultural employees in Britain were characterized by the use of child labor. Children were useful in the factories due to the small size that permitted them to move through tiny spaces (“Mobilizing Industrial Labor”). The application of child labor caused numerous accidents in the factories that led to injuries. This matter was triggered by the need to support families due to the low wages earned by adults. Also, they were paid less compared to grown-ups, which raised the need for their services. Children received the third or one-fourth of the adult's earnings, which made the demand for their labor high. The fact that the kids did not have the knowledge to demand better wages and working conditions meant that they were preferred in the exploitative production system. The lack of proper mechanisms for enforcing the rights of children also heightened the use of underage labor.

Go to our website

Choose a type of paper you need

Indicate additional requirements for your essay

Pay for the order

Get your flawless paper on time

There were various reasons why inequality had grown during the agricultural and industrial period in Britain during the late 1700s and the 1800s. First, with a massive production in factories and agricultural centers, the production raised (Mantoux 26). It boosted the incomes of merchants who mobilized large amounts of labor. On the other hand, the earnings of workers plummeted or remained the same despite raising the incomes of the merchants who controlled the means of production. The disparities of the incomes of these two categories increased the income gap.

Additionally, the growth in income disparities during the late 1700s and 1800 had been caused by the disruption of the means of production. During the time, a large industrial production that was factory-based increased. It led to the decline of cottage and home production that was applied by peasants and artisans in the rural areas (Sokoloff and Engerman 223). Those who had the resources reaped big from the mechanized and industrial production at the expense of rural producers who could not compete. As a result, income disparities had grown between the capitalists within the agricultural and industrial centers versus the statesmen whose jobs were replaced and forced to work for those controlling the resources.

Several obstacles were faced in an attempt to narrow the income gaps that occurred during the late 1700s and the late 1800s. One of the challenges was resistance by employers (Mantoux 27). They felt that giving the workers better working conditions would lead them to lose critical labor, which they acquired in the production centers. Consequently, they showed less goodwill to improve the working conditions of employees. Besides, there were the obstacles relating to the fact there were no regulations and organized bodies to enforce the better pay and working conditions. When the workers protested, they were subjected to contract terminations and harsh treatments, which created fear. Consequently, it allowed workers to exploit them through poor pay. The obstacle had persisted to 1800 when organized unions started to be formed (“Mobilizing Industrial Labor”). The barriers made it difficult to address the wage exploitation that the workers were subjected to.

The private and public sector policy measures would have helped to address the incomes during the agricultural and industrial phases in Britain. At the private sector rate, developing contracts that outlined the working conditions of workers would have enabled employers to provide better wages to their employees. In this regard, the private sector players would have come up with standard contracts that defined the working conditions with penalties for those who violated the requirements. This policy framework would have helped to build a motivated hardworking workforce to sustain the high level of production. Besides, the regulation would have ensured a higher income base that allows the workers to increase their production to support the massive demand for raw materials in the industries.

On the other hand, the public sector could have come up with some regulations protecting workers from the employer exploitation. However, at the time, the laws safeguarded the employer. Such ones included the Master and Servant Act that made it compulsory for the employees to follow the orders of masters (“Mobilizing Industrial Labor”). In this regard, the public sector could have developed regulations that prevented employer exploitation of workers, including the illegal child labor that was rampant. Also, the public sector would have given the workers a legal framework to form labor unions, in which they would have protested for their rights of minimum wages and working conditions. The public sector could also have put in some regulations to ensure that the earnings of the factory owners were taxed and the proceeds used to develop the rural peasants who were displaced by the industrial production (Milanovic 57). It would have guaranteed that the income disparities were addressed.

To conclude, labor conditions among the agricultural and factory workers in Britain during the late 1700s and 1800 had been characterized by hard labor, long working conditions, poor payments, and the use of child labor. It led to a rise in income gaps as the capitalist merchants were growing wealth employing cheap labor at the expense of rural statement. The obstacles that prevented bridging the income gaps included the absence of goodwill by employers to increase the working conditions of workers, as well as the lack of legal mechanisms for enforcing working contracts. The private sector would have played a role in improving the working conditions by coming up with some policies on working conditions. On the other hand, the public sector would have passed laws to govern the employers, as well as taxing the production merchants, as well as use the funds to assist the poor rural peasants.

Guarantees

Email delivery Your paper is uploaded to your account and you get a copy delivered by email.	Wide range of services Your get wide range of high quality services from our professional team.	Authentic papers All papers are written from scratch up to your instructions
Privacy guarantee No personal data is ever disclosed to any third parties.	Deadline meeting Any paper ordered will be delivered strictly according to the deadline.	Satisfaction guarantee All our customer are totally satisfied with their orders.
No plagiarism All papers you order are plagiarism free.	24/7 customer support Our Support Representatives are at your service 24/7 365 days a year.	Free revision Each customer has 48 hours after deadline expires to get paper revised.