Did Manual Workers Want Industrial Welfare? Canteens, Latrines and Masculinity on British Building Sites 1918–1970

Whether or not manual workers actually valued industrial welfarism has been largely subsumed within the debate over its productive or coercive function. Yet many workers seemingly placed little importance on such benefits, either when demanded by unions or provided by employers. This rebuttal should not be read only in terms of the primacy of money wages within a hierarchy of demands. Taking construction as an example of a male dominated industry, it is argued that key aspects of welfarism ran counter to masculine constructs of workplace culture. Improved physical amenities devalued such defining attributes of worker identity as self-sufficiency and toughness; even cash benefits like paid holidays were misappropriated by a significant minority who preferred more traditional manly pleasures. Yet the value placed on "conditions of work" issues also reflected broader structural changes within the industry: notably issues of workplace control. Only in such contexts can attitudes to welfare be understood. It was never simply a question of want or dislike.