Is What Guy Standing Calls The Precariat

Research Topic #2:

Is what Guy Standing calls the ‘precariat’ a new phenomenon or is it something that has existed before? Can we describe precarious workers as a new class or are they a status within a broader class?

Synopsis:

I argue that what Guy Standing calls the ‘precariat’ is a new phenomenon, unlike any other class that has existed before. Precarious workers are a new class in our capitalist neoliberal society, due to workers dependence on precarious work, which forces people into: part-time, temporary, contract, zero job security employment positions. This differs and refutes Palmer’s argument of the precariat being a branch of the proletariat class as the precarious class do not have the employment stability, job security and flexibility,

nor the stable identity that is seen among the proletariat class, further proving the partition, and disparity present among the classes.

With establishing this new class, comes the danger and power associated with this precarious class. Due to the sheer volume and desperation of the class, it shows how society is failing these workers. With this, the precariat have the power to act against exclusion by transforming society due to their lack of stable identity. I argue with Marx and Standing as the precariat class lacks a common identity between its members; and that this missing identity and solidarity between the workers is what is reinforcing the exploitation present this class. If this class shifts from a class in itself; meaning the members within a class all have commonalities yet seize to recognize that these commonalities are what joins them all together; and shift to a class for itself; meaning workers realize the similarities present among the class or having class conscienceness, the precariat class will have the power and solidarity to be able to rise up collectively to fight for their similar interests and against the exploitation and precious work plaguing todays workforce and society. Overall I argue in order for the way work is distributed and engaged in today to be changed, the precariat class need to organize in productive ways to be able to transform society and

combat inequality. I hope to further unpack and develop Standing’s argument that the precariat is a new dangerous class to neoliberal society, by overall hoping to prove that they are much more than a status within a broader class.

Thesis:
The ‘precariat’, is not only a new phenomenon developed and present in capitalist neoliberal society today, that has never existed before; but is a entirely new class due to its dependence of precarious work, and the absent labour market, and employment security, such as traditionally seen with the proletariat class.

Due to this, the precariat class is an ever emerging dangerous class, unlike any before; who by switching from a class in itself, to a class for itself could ultimately avail their power in order to abolish the exploitation and precarious work presently forced upon them.

Arguments:
I argue the ‘precariat’ is a new class unlike any existing class before, differing from the proletariat class, as discussed in Fink, et. al’s, article; while refuting Palmer’s and Munck’s opposition. I will argue this class is a ever emerging dangerous class in capitalist and neoliberal society due to its precariousness and lack of social identity. I finally argue this class is a ‘class in itself’ and if switched to a ‘class for itself’ this class will be able to combat their working and living conditions for the better due to class coscienceness; using lecture material, Standing and Frase’s article's as evidence and support.

2 Peer Reviewed Articles:
Frase, P. (2013). “The Precariat: A Class or a Condition.” New Labor Forum, 22(2), p.11-14.
Fink, L., Loy-Wilson, S., Ngai, M. M. (2017). “The First Precariat?” International Labor and Working-Class History, 91, p.99-108.
Munck, R. (June, 2013). “The Precariat: A View from the South.” Third World Quarterly, 34(5), p.747-762. Refute