Industrial Revolution Working Conditions

The Industrial revolution was a period of inventions and economic expansions that occurred in Britain in the eighteenth century. With time and money efficient innovations, factories were on the rise and began to take over cities. Eventually, the Industrial revolution lead to the deterioration of working conditions for the poor. It is important to understand how the Industrial revolution shaped working conditions because the advancements that took place during this era lead to the current workplace laws and regulations. This paper will explore what made the industrial revolution such a dreary period for working class citizens, the working conditions labourers experienced, and the reason the government introduced the Factory Act. The industrial
revolution had adverse outcomes for citizens who found themselves in the working class.
The period of change society went through in the nineteenth century was called “the industrial revolution” because the changes were largely associated with industry. Many new innovations came into existence during this period, and changed the way factories were run. The industrialization that Britain went through “result[ed] in the creation of a class of wage laborers”. This was because despite these new innovations, “hand labour continued to reign supreme in the execution of production … machines often proved to be less efficient than hand labour”. This was a arduous period for the people in the working class. James Phillip Kay wrote a pamphlet which discussed both the moral and physical conditions of those in the working class during 1832. Some of the elements of life during this time he discussed included the lack of a nutritious diet, susceptibilities to disease, and absence of intellectual knowledge. He highlighted some of the horrific components of working life and claimed, “we fear that the condition of the working classes cannot be much improved, until the burdens and restrictions of the commercial system are abolished”. Therefore, he establishes that industrialization is the cause of the low quality of life citizens in the working class experienced. Henceforth, the way in which factories contributed to this shall be discussed, especially pertaining to the experiences of child labourers.
Child labour was not initially seen as exploitation of children.
It is argued that they were virtually “invisible players” in the industrial revolution. Sending children to work was what working families did to increase their income and help them get buy. However, if children were indeed invisible, laws surrounding the age one can work likely would not have come to be. Initially, children were advantageous employees in mills because the first machines were not very large, and their small and nimble hands were much more efficient in operating the machinery. Of course the machines eventually became larger, but this did not stop the manufacturers from employing children. The age at which a child was sent to work varied, but it would be the youngest age at which they possibly could work. Yes, children have always worked throughout history, primarily in their family’s homes or farms, but “When children do become more visible, in the late eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, it is chiefly as workers in the cotton factories”. It was even believed to be “normal” to have children working in the labour force if the number of children in the given population was high. The normalization of children in the workplace was used as an excuse by optimists who were attempting to deny the normalization of child
exploitation.
There is controversy regarding the effects of the industrial revolution.
Those who are optimistic in their beliefs of the effects of the revolution argue that children working was not a new occurrence of the industrial revolution as they looked “to eighteenth-century evidence in support.” They also argue that there was “little room for any increase in child employment in the Industrial Revolution, and … there may have even been a decrease”. Although it is likely that there was little increase in the percentage children who worked, the duration and intensity of shifts increased. The evidence that the rest of this paper will discuss focuses on a pessimistic view, which believes virtually every child in the working class was sent to work, and while at work they were
exploited.
The period of industrialization in Britain was deemed as broken. Jane Humphries states, “‘Broken Britain’ is the media’s favourite contemporary refrain, and dysfunctional families allegedly lie at its shattered core”. The family was deemed “shattered” because of the burden of work. Families had little time to spend together due to the long hours they would spend working. Also, during this time period, " One in four children in the UK comes from a fatherless family … [and] lone parenthood sets the scene for child poverty”. The consequences of this include “emotional and psychological problems, drug use, poor educational outcomes, teenage motherhood, crime, and domestic violence”. Life for members of the working class was dreary and dull after all, spending what must have seemed like countless hours in the factory under poor working conditions could drive anyone mad.
In the year 1832, Michael Sadler interviewed a number of people to gain insight into the environments of textile factories. He complied his findings into “the Sadler Committee Report” which provides very valuable insight into the lives of those in industrial Britain who were located in the working class. From this report, it is obvious to the reader that working conditions during this period were not good. When one interviewee was asked, “Why do you allow your children to go to work at those places where they are ill-treated or over-worked?”, his response was that “Necessity compels a man that has children to let them work.” Since this period was one of economic distraught, children were seen as a valuable resource because they could contribute to the family income as soon as they were old enough to respond to demands. The family needed money so they had no choice but to send their children to work.