Social churn: Nobody in America seems to know who can be identified as 'working class' anymore

What makes someone ‘working class’ was never really clear—it was something you knew when you saw it. The concept emerged after the Industrial Revolution of the 18th and 19th century, which moved people from working the land to working in factories. ‘Working class’ came to mean someone who did manual labour and probably lived a financially precarious and physically gruelling life.

In the 20th century, the working class organized through labour unions and gained political power, becoming the backbone of the middle class. Many US working-class jobs—in, say, manufacturing or transportation—came with better pay, safer working conditions and more security.

So-called white-collar jobs (the term may originate with Upton Sinclair) probably also involved a pay-cheque, but those workers did not do much physical labour and accumulated both financial and human capital. They also had relatively more economic and job security.

The divide between the white-collar and working-class began to grow towards the end of the 20th century and into the 21st. Technology and globalization meant there were fewer traditional working-class jobs, and in the meantime those trends conferred more wealth on white-collar workers.

The new economy also created more service jobs in healthcare, education and government, and those workers became the new backbone of the US middle class.

The phrase ‘working class’ came to refer not to the middle but to the lower-middle class, and it became synonymous with low-paid physical work and instability. The term did retain its political resonance; people like Samuel ‘Joe the Plumber’ Wurzelbacher were still important, at least rhetorically. And their fall in economic stature emerged as a major social and economic issue.

All these changes illustrate the importance of defining the term ‘working class’: It identifies a population that is struggling in a changing economy and needs support or policies that help achieve security. It also remains a potent political force whose needs often drive economic policy, for good or bad.

That latter detail is also redefining ‘working class.’ A recent strike at Long Island Railroad revealed that many conductors make six figures, not including pension benefits that are worth millions of dollars. Yes, it is a union job and it involves physical labour—but if someone is in the top 10% of earners, can they really be called ‘working class’?

As the economy continues to evolve, the meaning of that term will as well. Regardless, these workers will continue to have political clout and policy will need to address their concerns.

In the last few decades, technology has resulted in fewer jobs that require physical labour or involve routine tasks. But the jobs that do remain tend to be more highly skilled and more highly paid. Wages in the US manufacturing and construction sectors have increased over the years relative to many in the service industry.

The upshot is that the population with traditional working-class jobs is becoming much smaller and better paid. That means they will probably have less political clout and less need for support.

Meanwhile, as AI threatens many white-collar jobs, a new working class may be emerging. Many of these workers will have less job security and receive lower pay than their peers with jobs that require physical labour.

And what about Graham Platner?

He represents two aspects of what I think of as a new underclass: men who get a lot of their income from benefits, and people from affluent families who cannot replicate their parents’ wealth or lifestyle. Platner attended an exclusive high school and his parents are a lawyer and a restaurateur.

Platner’s definition of working class may not apply to himself. But in many ways, he embodies the US ‘working class’—both as it has historically been understood and what is becoming. ©Bloomberg

The author is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering economics.