1 - If the Davis-Moore hypothesis is right, then why are we calling grocery workers, meatpacking workers and nurses "heroes" in our current pandemic? Why are they then paid less than professors? What might be the flaw in their arguments?
The theory of Davis-Moore hypothesizes that stratification and inequality usually in the form of job specialization and division of labor is an important aspect of our society therefore it is important that it exists and remains intact. In his view, the division and stratification plays an important role in the way that it helps to keep the current systems in place as everybody engages in their particular role they play in society. However, in the face of the emerging COVID 19 pandemic, there is a changing perception of a particular segment of the population that for a long time remained ignored because of their roles in helping to keep the major sections of society in motion including food, gas station, farm hands and health practitioners.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The changes in the way that we perceive this section of society is an important shift from the Davis-Moore hypothesis that justifiably argue in support of the stratification of these groups. In fact, the label of “hero” has become a common concept as a sign of appreciating the roles that these group of workers play in the contemporary society during the pandemic. For most people, the current development is an eye opener to the roles that they play in our society and why it is important to acknowledge them as “heroes” because without their input it would otherwise be impossible to survive in these very difficult times. This then begs the question why is it that despite this new realization, the compensation levels of the employees have for a long time remained relatively lower compared to the academic scholar’s profession. The flaw of this argument of stratification is in the amount of difference pay because, like the epidemic has shown, their services are of equivalent value to society and thus it is important to re-evaluate the existing policy frameworks.
In retrospect, difference of the salary scales of these groups should be carefully assessed and the societal value attached to these groups. In as much as it may be impractical to close the bridge in their compensation rates, it will be essential that there are created framework to increase the current pay scales for each of these groups in the post-COVID 19 epidemic as a way of showing appreciation of their input during the pandemic. Davis-Moore’s not only inaccurately hypothesizes the need for inequality but also presents a weak argument to support his claims. The aspect of job specialization does not justify any of inequality and unfair work practices to particular worker groups because as the pandemic has taught us, every segment is important our very survival. As such, the stratification and inequality argumentative framework presented in the Social stratification theories remain flawed and thus while it will be important to maintain the job specialization; inequality should be progressively bridged as the arguments in the above discussions indicate. Indeed, they are not heroes during the pandemic but always are even in the days without it.
In the view of this paper, the hypothesis of Davis-Moore while may be flawed, it is indeed correct in its view that it is important for society to have structure where different groups of the society members each play different role. Mainly, this is because the element of job specialization is important for society to accomplish different job roles fundamental to our survival. In its absence, there would be an imbalance of the role and duties leading to poor survival. The salary indifference between these group and professors is a result of multiple factors that include the demand-and-supply dynamics, difference in the attached value of the services to each profession and policy frameworks that set up higher salary scales for the professors and lowers scales for these groups.
2 - Using the conflict theory of inequality, what does Jeff Bezos' (CEO of Amazon, Whole Foods and more) increase in wealth by $25 billion since the beginning of the year represent while "essential workers" are struggling to pay rent and basic necessities?
From a sociological point of view, the argumentative assertions made by the social conflict theory of inequality is very harmful and retrogressively makes the social aspects of society dysfunctional because it allows the existence of a structural system that works differently for the different social groups that exists within society. For the rich, the perpetuated inequality elements that are advanced by the theory allow the rich to continue becoming richer while the poor in society continues to suffer. In more explicit terms, even in dire times such as during the COVID 19 pandemic, while the largest group of poor individuals continue to struggle even to meet their most basic needs in terms of rent and foods, Jeff Bezo’s wealth continues to grow even bigger as the statistics indicate. Is it that rich have an ability that is unique to them compared to the others in the general frameworks of society? While some may argue, it is the case; it is evidently only a single side of the story because while it may be partially true, it does not explain the whole story. Unequal distribution of the income generated within an economy, in the view of this paper is the principal reason that the wealthy group continue to accrue higher amounts of wealth while the poor continue to get poor. The case of Bezzos and his story of continued growth of his wealth even when the general population in the modern society continues to struggle even with the most basic essentials in their life is a testimony of this indifference in the way that wealth is distributed across the poor and the rich.
Thus from a sociological point of view, the increase of Bezzo’s wealth while other people in the low income segment continue to struggle to meet their most basic needs is representative of the existing structural systems that propagate such policies that disadvantageously work for the rich through unequal distribution of the resources. It is also important to note that while inequality explains the phenomenon, it is accurate to note that also the rich also have a lot of surplus income that they mainly utilize for investment that are core to the generation of additional wealth that make them grow their wealth more compared to the poor groups who only use their disposable income to cater for their daily needs. Every story has multiple sides to it and I think like the above discussions indicate the Bezzo’s case is a combination of these factors in the above sections. The conflict inequality theory assertions are relatively evident shown therein through Bezzo’s (Representative of the Rich Class) continues to build wealth even during the pandemic when the poor struggle to meet their most basic needs.
