Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Wage forms and hierarchy in late 19th century French industry

Contents:

Author Info

  • Jérôme Bourdieu
  • Gilles Postel-Vinay

    ()

Abstract

Two opposing views of industrialization are commonly expressed. The first emphasizes capitalism’s coercion of workers into furnishing more effort than they had long been accustomed to when they themselves decided the rhythm and timing of work. In this optic, factory discipline is an essential part of capitalist development. The second point of view notes that the need for factory discipline emerged only slowly during the Nineteenth Century, as increasingly productive technologies rendered the closer coordination of workers essential. Both views agree that largescale production, the division of labour, and the breakdown of tasks into individual standardized operations were essential to the industrial firm of the XIXth century. They also agree that achieving such an organization implied reshaping labour relations within the firm, and the development of a hierarchical structure of decision and control, which was implemented on the shop floor by a new character: the foreman. However, advocates of the first view argue that foremen were a necessary condition of capitalist development, as the generalisation of supervisory tasks in labour relations was a distinctive feature of the organization of new industrial plants. In the second view, foremen only progressively became more important, and were simply a corollary of the development of large firms. To distinguish between these two views it would thus seem important to determine if, and at which pace, firms recruited more foremen over time. Answering these questions is fraught with difficulty, if only because, over time, foremen were not always explicitly identified, either because they may have played a number of different roles in the firm or because their position was not defined as such. These type of questions are usually addressed via case studies and research monographs as the best way of capturing precisely the evolution of hierachical organization over a protracted period of time. Here we will argue, paradoxically, that cross-sectional analysis is perhaps better suited to the systematic observation of the long run evolution of work organization inside firms, insofar as it allows reliable comparisons between a large number of firms with a clear definition of who exactly the foremen were.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://www.inra.fr/Internet/Departements/ESR/UR/lea/documents/wp/wp0607.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Laboratoire d'Economie Appliquee, INRA in its series Research Unit Working Papers with number 0607.

as in new window
Length: 18 pages
Date of creation: Jul 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:lea:leawpi:0607

Contact details of provider:
Postal: INRA-LEA, 48, Boulevard Jourdan, 75014 Paris, France
Phone: 331 43136364
Fax: 331 43136362
Web page: http://www.inra.fr/Internet/Departements/ESR/UR/lea/index.html

Related research

Keywords: French industry; 19th century; industrialization; factory discipline; worker; foreman; division of labour; time work; capitalism; France;

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

Citations

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:lea:leawpi:0607. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Madeleine Roux) The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Madeleine Roux to update the entry or send us the correct address.

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.