In the 16th, 17th and 18th centuries Labour markets in London and in certain Dutch cities were segmented amongst gender lines negatively affecting women. Using Elise Van Meerkerk’s and Peter Earle’s articles as main sources, the aim of this essay is too dissect how the labour markets are segmented first in London and then in Dutch cities such as Leiden and Tilbury. Then to assess how in London there is stability of segmentation throughout the pre-industrial to the industrialised period. However, within the Dutch cities, economic fluctuation creates instability in segmentation over time.
Earle uses Clarks’ work to analyse whether there was ‘bon viex temps’ (Earle pg 328) for working women during the pre-industrial era before capitalism moved industry out of the home due to an increase in the scale of …show more content…
His main evidence is from the depositions of female witnesses before the London Church courts between 1695 and 1725. Yet key flaws of the sample include a shortage of young females and also older women of 45+, however this could be a reflection of the London population due to immigration and low life expectancy. There is an area bias as well; over representation of the West End and an underrepresentation of the North and South suburbs. Overall Earle admits this makes the sample biased towards women of artisan or working class nature which makes the basis of his work less reliable. In contrast, Meerkerk bases her argument on Bonacichs Split Labour Market theory which suggests that markets always split along ethnic and gender lines, and Dual Market theory which refers to a Core group of skilled high earning workers who are mostly male and a Periphery group of low skilled and poor workers, mainly women, migrants
Earle uses Clarks’ work to analyse whether there was ‘bon viex temps’ (Earle pg 328) for working women during the pre-industrial era before capitalism moved industry out of the home due to an increase in the scale of …show more content…
His main evidence is from the depositions of female witnesses before the London Church courts between 1695 and 1725. Yet key flaws of the sample include a shortage of young females and also older women of 45+, however this could be a reflection of the London population due to immigration and low life expectancy. There is an area bias as well; over representation of the West End and an underrepresentation of the North and South suburbs. Overall Earle admits this makes the sample biased towards women of artisan or working class nature which makes the basis of his work less reliable. In contrast, Meerkerk bases her argument on Bonacichs Split Labour Market theory which suggests that markets always split along ethnic and gender lines, and Dual Market theory which refers to a Core group of skilled high earning workers who are mostly male and a Periphery group of low skilled and poor workers, mainly women, migrants