Background is barrier in working life 

Inequality in professional occupations 

In a recent paper, researchers from the Queen Mary University’s Centre for Research in Equality and Diversity published their analysis of data from 3,336 people working in higher managerial and professional roles across the UK between 2021 and 2023.

They found a clear pattern of inequality based on socio-economic background that continues to shape people’s working lives long after they enter professional and managerial jobs.  

A triple disadvantage in the workplace 

The team found that people from less privileged families face a “triple disadvantage”: 

• Lower access to elite professions 

• Lower pay once they get there 

• Worse working conditions, even in the same role 

These disadvantages were visible across multiple aspects of job quality, including: 

• Promotion prospects 

• Workload 

• Job complexity 

• Relationships with managers 

• Relationships with colleagues 

Across all these measures, workers from lower socio-economic backgrounds consistently scored lower than their wealthier peers. Poorer job quality is strongly linked to worse mental and physical health, weaker career progression, and higher exit from professions. 

This  challenges a central assumption about social-mobility that once people reach high-status jobs, inequality has been resolved. In reality, inequality often moves inside the workplace.  

Two people with the same job title and salary can experience radically different working lives. If people from less privileged backgrounds are more likely to experience worse conditions inside professional jobs, then metrics such as earnings and job titles are incomplete and mask a deeper, structural inequality. Ignoring job quality risks overstating progress on social mobility.

What should employers do?  

Supporting people from disadvantaged backgrounds into professional jobs is vital but we can’t stop there. Our research shows that many of these workers go on to experience worse conditions, fewer opportunities and weaker support, meaning social mobility is being undermined from within.  

To rectify this, Professor Williams and his team recommend employers seeking to improve fairness in their workplace should: 

• measure socio-economic background using simple indicators such as parental occupation 

• monitor job quality, not just pay gaps 

• analyse differences within roles, not only between grades 

• ensure equitable access to progression, support and development 

Importantly, these are not abstract ideals. Valid tools already exist, and a growing number of employers are demonstrating that this data can be collected and used responsibly. 

What should policy makers do?  

Policy debates on social mobility tend to focus on who gets into professional jobs. But this research from Queen Mary shows it often misses a crucial dimension of inequality: what happens after people get there. 

It shows that a fair labour market is not just one that opens doors, but one that ensures equal treatment, opportunity and quality of work once people are inside. And that a serious approach to social mobility requires looking beyond who enters elite occupations to how those jobs are structured and experienced. Bodies responsible for monitoring mobility and opportunity can support this by ensuring indicators of job quality sit alongside earnings and job titles, as well as:  

• tracking non-pay job quality alongside pay and occupational attainment 

• recognising in-work inequality as a core mobility issue 

• integrating working conditions into life-chances analysis 

Find out more

The Centre for Research in Equality and Diversity (CRED) at Queen Mary, was established in 2005 and is a prominent international research centre at the leading edge of equality and diversity research.

Find out more about the work of the Centre for Research in Equality and Diversity