Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-05T04:17:17.427Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Class, gender and chance: the social division of welfare and occupational pensions in the United Kingdom

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 November 2008

TRAUTE MEYER  and
PAUL BRIDGEN
TRAUTE MEYER*
Affiliation:
Division of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
PAUL BRIDGEN*
Affiliation:
Division of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Southampton, Southampton, UK.
*
Address for correspondence: Traute Meyer and Paul Bridgen, Division of Sociology and Social Policy, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK E-mails: [email protected] and [email protected]
Address for correspondence: Traute Meyer and Paul Bridgen, Division of Sociology and Social Policy, School of Social Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK E-mails: [email protected] and [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The social division of welfare literature emphasises the extent to which occupational-pension provision is distributed on the basis of class and gender. As most previous commentators have at least implicitly recognised, however, a significant proportion of less advantaged people are covered. This paper argues that the patterns of access and their distributional consequences must be considered more systematically, and that in this context, the diversity of employers' pension schemes are investigated. When this is done, it emerges that in the United Kingdom, the spread of occupational provision beyond the most privileged workers means that some vulnerable individuals avoid poverty in retirement. At the same time, however, the main determinant of which less advantaged people are covered and which not is chance. While class and gender are important predictors of who receives occupational pensions, access for the disadvantaged arises mainly as an accident of an employment decision made for reasons unrelated to savings or pensions criteria. This paper argues that the implication is that unsustainable justice-based arguments are currently used by policy makers to sanction the current distribution of UK pension incomes. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of the findings for the appropriateness of recent UK policy proposals and for international debates about pension reform.

Keywords

socialdivisionwelfareoccupationalpensionsjusticeTitmusschance
Type
Research Article
Information
Ageing & Society , Volume 28 , Issue 3 , April 2008 , pp. 353 - 381
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Anderson, K. 2004. Pension politics in three small states: Denmark, Sweden and The Netherlands. Canadian Journal of Sociology, 29, 2, 289–312.Google Scholar
Arber, S. 1989. Class and the elderly. Social Studies Review, 4, 3, 90–5.Google Scholar
Armingeon, K. and Bonoli, G. (eds) 2006. Post Industrial Welfare States. Routledge, London.Google Scholar
Baldwin, P. 1990. The Politics of Social Solidarity: Class Bases of the European Welfare States. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Banks, J., Emmerson, C., Oldfield, Z. and Tetlow, G. 2005. Prepared for Retirement? The Adequacy and Distribution of Retirement Resources in England. Institute of Fiscal Studies, London. Available online at www.ifs.org.uk/comms/r67.pdf [Accessed February 2006].CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bannink, D. 2005. Private Pensions and Social Inclusion: The Dutch Case in Comparative Perspective. Paper presented at the ESPAnet conference, Fribourg, Switzerland, September 2005. Available online at http://www.unifr.ch/travsoc/espanet05/papers/pap10B-03.pdf [Accessed October 2005].Google Scholar
Bennett, R. J., Graham, D. J. and Bratton, W. 1999. The location and concentration of businesses in Britain: business clusters, business services, market coverage and local economic development. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 24, 4, 393–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Blake, D. 2000. Does it matter what type of pension you have? Economic Journal, 110, February, F46–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonoli, G. 2000. The Politics of Pension Reform: Institutions and Policy Change in Western Europe. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridgen, P. and Meyer, T. 2005a. When do benevolent capitalists change their mind? Explaining the retrenchment of defined benefit pensions in Britain. Social Policy and Administration, 39, 7, 764–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridgen, P. and Meyer, T. 2005b. Towards a ‘balanced’ approach to pensions reform? Individuals, the state and employers in the restructuring of post-retirement income in the UK. Discussion Paper, Pensions Institute, London. Available online at: http://www.pensions-institute.org/papers.html Accessed December 2005 [Accessed December 2006].Google Scholar
Bridgen, P. and Meyer, T. 2007. Private pensions versus social inclusion? Three patterns of provision and their impact. In Meyer, T., Bridgen, P. and Riedmuller, B. (eds) Private Pensions versus Social Inclusion? Non-state Provision for Citizens at Risk in Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire.Google Scholar
British Broadcasting Company 2005. Deal on Public Sector Pensions. News broadcast, 18 October. Available online at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4353444.stm [Accessed March 2006].Google Scholar
Burchardt, T. 1997. What Price Security? STICERD Paper WSP129, Suntory and Toyota International Centres for Economics and Related Disciplines, London School of Economics, London.Google Scholar
Cable, D. M. and Graham, M. E. 2000. The determinants of job seekers' reputation perceptions. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21, 8, 929–47.3.0.CO;2-O>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Castles, F. G. 2003. The world turned upside down: below replacement fertility, changing preferences and family-friendly public policy in 21 OECD countries. Journal of European Social Policy, 13, 3, 209–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Confederation of British Industry (CBI) and Mercer Human Consulting 2004. A View From the Top: A Survey of Business Leaders' View of UK Pension Provision. CBI Publications, London.Google Scholar
Coombes, M. and Raybould, S. 2004. Finding work in 2001: urban-rural contrasts across England in employment rates and local job availability. Area, 36, 2, 202–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Council of the European Union 2003. Joint Report by the Commission and the Council on Adequate and Sustainable Pensions. Council of the European Union, Brussels. Available online at http://europa.eu.int/comm/employment_social/soc-prot/pensions/index_en.htm [Accessed September 2005].Google Scholar
Daily Telegraph, The 2006. Black hole in public pensions is £81 billion. 27 February. Available online at http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/02/27/npens27.xml [Accessed March 2006].Google Scholar
Department of Social Security (DSS) 1998. A New Contract in Welfare: Partnership in Pensions. DSS, London.Google Scholar
Department of Social Security 1999. The Changing Welfare State. Opportunity for All: Tackling Poverty and Social Exclusion. DSS, London.Google Scholar
Department for Work and Pensions 2002. Simplicity, Security and Choice: Working and Saving for Retirement. Cm5677, Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) 2004. Income-related Benefits Estimates of Take-up in 2000/2001. DWP, London.Google Scholar
Department of Work and Pensions 2006. Security in Retirement: Towards a New Pensions System. DWP, London. Available online at http://www.dwp.gov.uk/pensionsreform/pdfs/white_paper_complete.pdf [Accessed October 2006].Google Scholar
Eurostat 2003. Gross Wages and Salaries. Eurostat, Luxembourg. Available online at http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/ [Accessed December 2006].Google Scholar
Fawcett, H. 1996. The Beveridge straightjacket: policy formation and the problem of poverty in old age. Contemporary British History, 10, 1, 20–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Financial Times, The 2004a. Businesses Consider Swapping Pensions for Cash. National news section, 28 June.Google Scholar
Financial Times, The 2004b. Expert sees Public Sector Pension Gap. National news section, 21 May. Financial Times, London.Google Scholar
Ginn, J. 2003. Gender, Pensions and the Life Course: How Pensions Need to Adapt to Changing Family Forms. Policy Press, Bristol, Avon.Google Scholar
Ginn, J. and Arber, S. 1991. Gender, class and income inequalities in later life. British Journal of Sociology, 42, 3, 369–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginn, J. and Arber, S. 1993. Pension penalties: the gendered division of occupational welfare. Work, Employment and Society, 7, 1, 47–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginn, J. and Arber, S. 1999. Changing patterns of pension inequality: the shift from state to private sources. Ageing & Society, 19, 3, 319–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goode Committee 1994. Pensions Law Reform. CM 2342–1, Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Goodman, A., Johnson, P. and Webb, S. 1997. Inequality in the UK. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Google Scholar
Government Actuary's Department 2003. Occupational Pension Schemes 2000: Eleventh Survey April 2003. Government Actuary's Department. London. Available online at www.gad.gov.uk/Publications/docs/opss2000_final_results_final_7april2003.pdf [Accessed February 2005].Google Scholar
Graham, H. 1987. Being poor: perceptions and coping strategies of lone mothers. In Brannen, J. and Wilson, G. (eds) Give and Take in Families. Allen and Unwin, London, 56–74.Google Scholar
Guardian, The 2004. A Fairer Future. News article, 12 January. The Guardian, London.Google Scholar
Gustmann, A. L., Mitchell, O. S. and Steinmeier, T. L. 1994. The role of pensions in the labor market: a survey of the literature. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 47, 3, 417–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hannah, L. 1986. Inventing Retirement. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hantrais, L. 1999. Socio-demographic change, policy impacts and outcomes in social Europe. Journal of European Social Policy, 9, 4, 291–309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henderson, S. and Hoggart, K. 2003. Ruralities and gender divisions of labour in Eastern England. Sociologica Ruralis, 43, 4, 349–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyde, M., Dixon, J. and Drover, G. 2003. Welfare retrenchment or collective responsibility? The privatisation of public pensions in Western Europe. Social Policy and Society, 2, 3, 189–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Income Data Services (IDS) 2002. Pension Schemes and their Benefits 2002/3. IDS, London.Google Scholar
Income Data Services 2003. Pensions in Practice 2003/04. From Primary Legislation to Practical Implementation. IDS, London.Google Scholar
Income Data Services 2004. Pensions After Final Salary 2003/04. IDS, London.Google Scholar
Johnson, P. and Rake, K. 1998. Comparative social policy research in Europe. Social Policy Review, 10, 257–78.Google Scholar
Joseph Rowntree Foundation 1995. Inquiry into Income and Wealth. Volume 2, Joseph Rowntree Foundation, York.Google Scholar
Loretto, W., White, P. and Duncan, C. 2001. ‘Thatcher's children’. Pensions and retirement: some survey evidence. Personnel Review, 30, 4, 386–403.Google Scholar
Lynes, T. 1997. The British case. In Rein, M. and Wadensjö, E. (eds) Enterprise and the Welfare State. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire, 309–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mares, I. 2001. Firms and the welfare state: when, why, and how does social policy matter to employers? In Hall, P. and Soskice, D. (eds) Varieties of Capitalism. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 184–212.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mayhew, V. 2001. Pensions 2000: Public Attitudes to Pensions and Planning for Retirement. DSS Research Report 130, Department of Social Security, Corporate Document Services, Leeds, Yorkshire.Google Scholar
Meyer, T., Bridgen, P. and Riedmüller, B. (eds) 2007. Private Pensions versus Social Inclusion? Non-state Provision for Citizens at Risk in Europe. Edward Elgar, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) 2005. Pensions at a Glance. OECD, Paris.Google Scholar
Office of National Statistics 2006. Analytic Classes and Operational Categories and Sub-categories of NS-SEC. Office of National Statistics, London. Available online at http://www.statistics.gov.uk/methods_quality [Accessed April 2006].Google Scholar
Pahl, J. 1989. Money and Marriage. Macmillan, Basingstoke, Hampshire.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pedersen, A. W. 2004. The privatization of retirement income? Variation and trends in the income packages of old-age pensioners. Journal of European Social Policy, 14, 1, 5–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pensions Commission 2004. Pensions: Challenges and Choices: The First Report of the Pensions Commission. Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Pensions Commission 2005. A New Pensions Settlement for the Twenty-first Century: The Second Report of the Pensions Commission. Pensions Commission, London. Available online at http://www.pensionscommission.org.uk/publications/ [Accessed November 2005].Google Scholar
Pensions Policy Institute 2006. An Evaluation of the White Paper on State Pension Reform Proposals. Pensions Policy Institute, London. Available online at http://www.pensionspolicyinstitute.org.uk/uploadeddocuments/Nuffield/PPI_evaluation_of_WP_state_pension_reforms_20_July_2006.pdf [Accessed October 2006].Google Scholar
Plant, R. 1991. Modern Political Thought. Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
Pierson, P. 2001. Post-industrial pressures on mature welfare states. In Pierson, P. (ed.) The New Politics of the Welfare State. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 80–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Queisser, M. and Vittas, D. 2000. The Swiss Multi-pillar Pension System: Triumph of Common Sense? World Bank, Washington DC.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Queisser, M. and Whitehouse, E. 2003. Individual Choice in Social Protection: The Case of Switzerland. Social, Employment and Migration Working Paper 11, OECD, Paris. Available online at http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/13/46/7090927.pdf [Accessed May 2006].Google Scholar
Rawls, J. 1973. A Theory of Justice. Oxford University Press, London.Google Scholar
Ring, P. 2002. The implications of the ‘new insurance contract’ for UK pension provision: rights, responsibilities and risks. Critical Social Policy, 22, 4, 552–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rowlingson, K. 2002. Private pension planning: the rhetoric of responsibility, the reality of insecurity. Journal of Social Policy, 31, 4, 623–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sass, S. 1997. The Promise of Private Pensions: The First Hundred Years. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Saunders, P. 1996. Unequal but Fair: A Study of Class Barriers in Britain. Institute of Economic Affairs, London.Google Scholar
Schokkaert, E. and Van Parijs, P. 2003. Debate on social justice and pension reform. Journal of European Social Policy, 13, 3, 245–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sinfield, A. 1978. Analyses in the social division of welfare. Journal of Social Policy, 7, 2, 129–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Y., Gieselink, G. and Van Buggenhout, B. 2002. Towards a new role for occupational pensions in continental Europe: elements and techniques of solidarity used within funded occupational pension schemes. European Journal of Social Security, 4, 1, 25–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sunley, P. 2000. Pension exclusion in grey capitalism: mapping the pension gap in Britain. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 25, 4, 483–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Swift, A. and Marshall, G. 1997. Meritocratic equality of opportunity: economic efficiency, social justice, or both? Policy Studies, 18, 1, 35–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taylor Gooby, P. 1999. Markets and motives: implications for welfare. Journal of Social Policy, 29, 1, 97–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thomas, A., Pettigrew, N. and Tovey, P. 1999. Increasing Compulsory Pension Provision: Attitudes of the General Public and the Self-Employed. Stationery Office, London.Google Scholar
Titmuss, R. 1958. Essays on ‘The Welfare State’. Unwin, London.Google Scholar
Towers Perrin Human Resources Services 2004. Defined Contribution Pension Arrangements: Survey Results. Towers Perrin, London.Google Scholar
Turban, D. B. and Cable, D. M. 2003. Firm reputation and applicant pool characteristics. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 24, 6, 733–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vickerstaff, S., Cox, J. and Keen, L. 2003. Employers and the management of retirement. Social Policy and Administration, 37, 3, 271–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waine, B. 1995. A disaster foretold? The case of personal pensions. Social Policy and Administration, 29, 4, 317–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, A. 1999. The third way for pensions (by way of Thatcherism and avoiding today's pensioners). Critical Social Policy, 19, 4, 511–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whiteford, P. and Whitehouse, E. 2006. Pension challenges and pension reforms in OECD countries. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 22, 1, 78–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar