Discuss the Statement ‘the Division of Labour Creates Solidarity in the Workplace’ with Reference to Ideas from Durkheim and Marx. Illustrate Your Answer with Contemporary or Historical Examples

...

Although Marx supported industrialization but felt that due to technology, even though workers are divided into specialized tasks, machines in the workplace would soon take over workers and that it had the ability to create deskilling because with these machines, workers will become very lazy and would not work as hard as they will be reliant on these machines which is in contrast to Durkheim that believes that solidarity and division of labour are as a result of change in society i.e. industrialization. (Rhodes, 2005).

Durkheim also argued that division of labour is as a result of modern industrial production and in analysing how division of labour creates solidarity in the workplace, there needs to be a comparison of the principles according to which the less developed societies are organized with those that govern the organization of advanced societies.

In societies that are based on mechanical solidarity which mostly are traditional societies they are made up of groups that are very similar to each other in the organization. This group forms a society or work together because of the common beliefs and sentiments i.e. uniform thoughts, they have made it easier to achieve a goal. In cultures like that individuals were integrated into the society through collective conscience. (Giddens, 1971).

Organic solidarity which is now used in modern society is also created from division of labour whereby it is not solely based on having a common set of beliefs but from functional interdependence. Here individuals are said to progress and specialize in what they do through individualisation. Unlike mechanical solidarity where they have an identity, individuals that adopt the organic type of solidarity are dependent on one another through their differences in their beliefs. Through the organic form of solidarity, they have a diverse experience. (Giddens, 1971).

Although some people like Marx criticized Durkheim concerning his belief on how division of labour promotes solidarity in the workplace as they believe that once individuals in this modern society pursue their own interest it does not integrate the society rather it disintegrates it. Durkheim however did not agree with this statement, instead he believes that an increased division of labour leads to an increased connection between people as each started depending on one another for their livelihood. (Giddens, 1971:72).

This essay so far has been able to explain how and why Durkheim believes that division of labour creates solidarity in the workplace through unity as well as showing Marx’s contrasting view on division of labour and how he on the other hand, does not support it as he believes it does more harm than good to workers but still strongly supports class as a basis for the formation of a society. Though Durkheim believes that division of labour promotes solidarity but criticisms have been made based on this and division of labour is said to have its consequences.

Durkheim identifies that division of labour and solidarity have their negatives as seen in the anomic division of labour. For example, division of labour has to do with people working together doing specialized tasks while solidarity has to do with uniting. Durkheim argues that this solidarity might not just be positive but also negative as seen in certain professions for example the criminal profession.

Another consequence of division of labour is that an individual might be so engrossed with his own task that he isolates himself from others thus division of labour can lead to disintegration which Marx was trying to argue. (Durkheim, 1984).

August Comte, a theorist identified that division of labour is a source of solidarity though he still questions it as he said that yet division of labour brings people together to unite just for a short period with a view to exchanging personal services but it fails to give rise to any regulatory process. (Durkheim, 1984).

Another person who had an opposing view to Durkheim’s whole idea of division of labour leading to solidarity was Simmel (1971) who said that in the modern society, individuals are forced in retreating into their own world but Durkheim argued instead that the modern industrial society has actually freed people from feeling isolated by mutually depending on one another through an increased division of labour. (Grint, 2005).

Durkheim referred to anomie as being meaninglessness of work, generated between the disintegration of mechanical solidarity and creation of organic solidarity. During this period, new norms were yet to be spread throughout the society but was made worse through deskilling of work in the factory system where workers were forced to carry out meaningless operations. They could hardly create any mental picture of these products being produced through the division of labour process and they were making it for consumers they may never know. (Grint 2005:97).

Durkheim in contrast to Marx’s view about the determining role of the economy prevented him from regulating all institutions. He believed that it was the socially and morally grounded institutions that encouraged division of labour which encouraged the development of an individual’s skills which would create the future ideal place through “evolution not revolution, regulation not anarchy, solidarity through individualism and mutual dependence not conformity through uniformity”. (Grint 2005:98). This quote clearly contrasts Marx and Durkheim’s view with Durkheim being the former and Marx, the latter.

From this essay, it is highly evident that Marx and Durkheim have different beliefs on division of labour promoting solidarity in the workplace. On one hand, through Marx’s arguments above, it can be seen that he is more focused on capitalism and believes that division of labour is more concerned with alienation whereas Durkheim supports the view that division of labour does promote solidarity even though criticisms have been made against his views.

In conclusion, I believe that division of labour creates solidarity in the workplace as seen by Durkheim because an organization as well as society cannot function properly without morality, law and people depending on one another in harmony to achieve a goal thus I support Durkheim’s view which is in contrast to Marx’s view as seen in this essay above.

Word count: 2127 (+10%)

References

Durkheim, E., Halls, W.D. and Coser, L. (1985) The division of labour in society. Bang stoke: Macmillan.

Fincham, R. and Rhodes, P.D. (2005) Principles of organizational behaviour: 4th edn.

...