Search

This paper examines the community situation of shipyard workers on Tyneside, certain aspects of their orientations to work and general social perspectives, and the relationship of these to each other and to the structure of social relations at work. In terms of their community situation shipyard workers would seem to come close to Lockwood's traditional proletarian type of worker. There is evidence to suggest, however, that these workers' social perspectives are not at all clearly traditional proletarian. The explanation for this is found, at least m part, m the much greater complexity of social relations at work than are accounted for in the model of traditional proletarianism. The paper suggests that existing typologies of the orientations and social perspectives of workers need to be refined by more detailed studies of the structural and relational aspects of both work and community situations. The paper concludes with a brief examination of changes in both industry and community and the likely effect of these on the social perspectives of shipbuilding workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Utilizing replies from a selected sample of contributors to the literature of symbolic interactionism, this paper examines the nature and extent of institutional ties among respondents holding similar views as to appropriate methodology in sociology. The specific institutional ties examined are those as: (1) fellow graduate students, (2) teachers and students, and (3) departmental colleagues. The methodological differences between the Chicago and Iowa schools, described in other studies, manifest themselves in the present sample, as do other views not neatly classifiable within either of these schools of symbolic interactionism. The more unconventional the conception of methodology held by a respondent, the more likely is the respondent to have been a fellow graduate student, a departmental colleague, and/or involved in a teacher-student relationship with other symbolic interactionists favoring the same conception. Respondents preferring the more orthodox methodological stances in modern sociology are less likely to have shared in such institutional flea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]