11/26/2015

MassProduction.PreWarHousing

Pre-War Housing (/)

Search

Home (/)
Abstract (/abstract.html)

THEWORKINGCLASSOWNEROCCUPIEDHOUSEOFTHE1930s
MODERNHISTORY:M.LITT:HILARYTERM1998
AlanCrispM.LittOxfordThesis1998Email(mailto:strollers7@gmail.com)
AttheendofthisthesisisanearlierpieceproducedfortheOpenUniversitycalled

Long Abstract (/longabstract.html)

CHAPTER 1 (/chapter1.html)
CHAPTER 2 (/chapter2.html)
CHAPTER 3 (/chapter3.html)
CHAPTER 4 (/chapter4.html)
CHAPTER 5 (/chapter5.html)
CHAPTER 6 (/chapter6.html)
Conclusion
(/conclusion.html)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(/bibliography.html)
ART AND SOCIETY IN THE
1930s (/art-and-societyin-the-1930s.html)

ARTANDSOCIETYINTHE1930SASREFLECTEDANDCONDITIONEDBYTHEPEOPLEOFTHETIME.

MassProduction.
In the 1930s the larger contractors, together with the Building Research Station, were experimenting with ways of building
houses quickly without the need for trained craftsmen. The experiments with system building was an attempt to get round
the difficulties of a booming industry and a shortage of skilled men, especially bricklayers. The Illustrated Carpenter and
Builderin1935notedthat'SeveralhousingschemesinScotlandweredelayedbecauseoftheshortageofbricklayers'(29).
The numbers of insured bricklayers did increase over the period 1930 to 1939 from seventynine thousand to one hundred
and ten thousand but the weekly wage rate remained fairly static during that period, moving only from 100 to 102 on the
scale used by Bowley (30). The insured workers registered as bricklayers would not have represented all the bricklayers
employed in the industry. It would also not show their level of skill or physical fitness. It is 'likely that most of the labour
employed by local authorities in their housebuilding programme were registered and that most of those casually employed
bythemajorityofspeculativebuilderswereunregistered'(31).
Thenewhousebuildingmethodsbeingexploredneededtobeabletobuildahouseofaconventionalarrangementandstyle
inordertosuitthetastesofthebuyers.Theoptionsavailableincludedtheprefabricationofpartsofhouses,andtheuseof
massproduced components, prefabricated frames in steel, concrete or in timber. Generally, the results were not good. A
decadelaterandevenwiththeexperiencesgainedfromthewar,the1944DudleyReportwastosaythat,
"The process of house construction is developing in the direction of greater preassembly of parts of the house in the
factory.Itisnotyetpossibletostatewithconfidencehowfarsuchmethodscanbecarriedwithsatisfactoryresults.While,
therefore,thecaseforentireprefabricationisbynomeansyetestablished,itispossiblethatinthefuturecompletehouses
may come to be built this way. Subject to sound construction coupled with sound planning and attention to the tenants'
comfort,weshouldwelcomeanysystemofmassproductionwhichwouldleadtogreaterspeedinerection"(32).
Granthasnotedthat'Everywhere,exceptintheUnitedStates,interwarexperimentsinprefabricationtooktheformofheavy
concrete or steel structures. Inevitably there were problems of cracking, leaking and corrosion' (33). Walls of poured
concrete and prelaid panels of bricks were alternatives tried but not used to any large degree. Trying to cost the new
methodswasnoteasy.Bowleysaidthat'Theproblemofdiscoveringwhetheronewayofbuildingischeaperthananotheris
mostbaffling'(34).Jacksonsaidthat'itisnotoriouslydifficulttoestimatewithaccuracythefullcostofbuildingahouseasit
wasthesumofalargenumberofitemswithlabouraccountingforaboutonethirdofthetotal'(35).Manyfactorswouldhave
affected the cost of a housing development on each site, such as distance from the suppliers of heavy items like bricks,
groundconditionsandtheEnglishweatherduringtheconstructionperiod.Wimpey'sNoFines,Laing'sEasyformandWates
precast concrete slabs were all developed by the named contractors during the 1920s and 1930s as ways of trying to
industrializethebuildingprocess.Theywerebasedaroundconcreteconstructionmethodsandrequiredtheconstructionof
formwork,intimberorsteel,aroundandintowhichconcretewaspoured.
Concrete used in the Easyform and NoFines method was made using aggregate of at least one inch there was no sand
usedinthemix.Crushedbrick,clinkerorconcretecouldbesubstitutedfortheaggregate,whichwasanadvantagesinceit
often was more readily available. The resultant mix was then poured into shutters. The disadvantage of using a poured
concrete system was that it only worked if large numbers of identical houses were being built it allowed no scope for
variations. The shuttering was easier to handle if cranes were used, which was not common in the English construction
industry and especially not during the 1930s. The resultant walls were difficult to fix into and to cut accurately. There was
also a considerable problem with dry shrinkage if the water content ratio was not strictly adhered to. Although unskilled
labourcanbeusedintheerectionoftheformworkandthepouringoftheconcrete,themixingandthecuringofthecement
is very critical and requires a high level of supervision. The system building methods using concrete were used in local
authoritycontractsbutseldominspeculativeschemesfortheprivatepurchaser.JohnLaingLimitedweretobuildestatesof

http://www.prewarhousing.org.uk/massproduction.html

1/3

11/26/2015

MassProduction.PreWarHousing
houses in 1924 using the Easyform system in south Wales in connection with the steel works, and for a number of local
authoritiesthroughoutEngland.'TheGosportBoroughEngineerwrotetotheTimestopraisethenewsystem,stressingthe
cavitywallsandtheroofsoftilesoverfelt122houseshadbeenbuiltforacostof54,000'(36).Thecostofthesehousesat
around 440 a house compares with the Ministry of Health report which showed that the cost of the standard nonparlour
house had fallen from nine hundred and thirty pounds in August 1920 to four hundred and thirty six pounds in March 1932
(37).Onthatevidencethesystembuilthousewasnotcheaperthantheconventionallybuiltdwelling,andthiswasfoundto
havebeengenerallybeenthecase.Fromtherelativefewestatesofsystembuilthouseswhichexistitappearsthatthere
was a reluctance even by local authorities to commission developments of this type. After the initial enthusiasm for the
prospect of massproducing houses by factory methods, very few estates were actually built. It is significant that of the
approximatelyfiftyfourthousandhousesbuiltby1944innontraditionalmethods,fiftythousandofthosehadbeenbuiltby
1928(38).Veryfewwerebuiltbythespeculativebuilderfortheworkingclasses.Theexperiencesgainedfromthetenants
wholivedinsystembuilthousesandthedifficultiesinobtainingskilledlabourtocompletethefittingsandfinishingofsuch
dwellingsledtothewaningoftheirpopularitywithlocalauthorities.Inthefinalanalysis,thesystembuilthousewasnotany
cheaperorquickertobuildthanaconventionallybuilthouse.Ithadthedisadvantageofbeinginflexibleindesign,difficultto
makeevensmallamendmentstoandliabletocrackandtohaveproblemswithcondensation.
Assubsidiesincreasedthroughthe1920stheproblemwasnotonlyashortageofcraftsmenbutofsomebuildingmaterials.
The supply of bricks was restricted as 'brickworks have fallen out of commission...in the period immediately after the war'
(39).Inaddition,thetransportsystemwasnotadequatetoservethenewdemandsmadebythebuildingindustry.Ifallthe
labourhadbeeninplaceandthematerialsneededinplentifulandconvenientsupply,theworkingclasshousesofthe1930s
might not have been built in the form they were. If there had been a plentiful supply of skilled labour prepared to work in a
flexiblemanneritislikelythatthesmallspeculativehousewouldhavebeenbetterbuilt,asthelabourwouldhavehadthe
inherentskillstoturnoutasuperiorproduct.
Takingthethreedivisionsofworkmenlikelytobeemployedinbuildingthesmallspeculativehousefortheworkingclasses,
(i)masonsandbricklayers,(ii)plasterers,paintersandplumbers,and(iii)labourersandmiscellaneous,onlyinclass(iii)was
thereanygrowth,31percent.to44percent.inthenumbersemployedovertheperiod19291936(40).
Theastonishinggrowthintheimportanceoftheunskilledworkeristhereforeconnectedwiththeintroductionnewmethodsof
production.Thespeculativebuilderwouldalsohaveusedthelabourers,thatistheunskilledelementofhislabourforce,to
handle new machinery such as diggers, pneumatic drills and cement mixers. The labourer was able to work the new
machinery,whichrequiredvirtuallynotraining,andhewasnotrestrictedbyanycraftbarriersorformalapprenticeship.The
speculativebuildercouldaffordtopaythelabourermorethanhisbasichourlyratetocarryoutsuchtasks,forthecostsof
labourwerenotmovingmuchduringthe1930sreinforcingtheviewthat'wagesarestickierthanprices'(41).Thelabourrates
tendedtoremainatroughlythesamelevelforaperiodoftime,thenmovedupinsuddenjumps.TheTimesof6July1937
quotedstatisticsfromtheMinistryofLabourtoindicatethatif1924istakenas100,thecostsfallgraduallydownto90by
1933wheretheyremainuntil1935andrisegraduallytoabout100bythetimetheSecondWorldWarstarted.Asanelement
intheoverallpriceofthesmallhouse,labourwasnotasimportantasthecostofmaterials.Itwasshownthatoutofaprice
rise of twentyseven pounds for a small nonparlour house in 1937 eight pounds is accounted for by material costs, three
pounds by labour and the balance of sixteen pounds is the profit of the developer. This last element would have included
overheads, reserves and an element for management salary (42). The Times article went on to say that the particular
problemsoftheindustryincompetingwithdemandsformaterialswereevidencedbythefactthatthe'MinistryofHealthhas
notedthatpriceshavebeenlesskeenandlessfinelyquotedowingtouncertaintyduetowhetherlabourandmaterialswould
be available...contractors are quoting higher and higher because they do not want the business...rise in cost of timber
accountsfor60percentoftheincreaseinthecostofallmaterials'.

(29)IllustratedCarpenterandBuilder(31May1935).
(30) Marian Bowley, The British Building Industry: Four Studies in Response and Resistance to Change (Cambridge,
1966),appendixtable5and8a.pp.270and280.
(31)InterviewwithFrankTaylorinAugust1994.
(32)TheDudleyReport,p.27,paras116117.
(33)C.Grant(ed).BuilttoLast(London,1992),p.78.
(34)MarianBowley,TheBritishBuildingIndustry:FourStudiesinResponseandResistancetoChange(Cambridge,1966),
p.41.
(35)A.Jackson,SemidetachedLondon(London,1991),p.151.
(36)R.Coad,Laing(London,1979),p.76.
(37)A.Jackson,SemidetachedLondon(London,1991),p.60.
(38)MarianBowley,HousingandtheState19191945(London,1966),p.196.
(39)ibid.,para183.
(40) The figures are taken from R.Allen and B.Thomas The London Building Industry and its Labour Recruitment through
EmploymentExchanges,EconomicJournal47,(September,1937).p.465.
(41)EconomicJournal,49,(October,1939),p.425.
(42)TheTimes(6July1937).Leadingarticle.

http://www.prewarhousing.org.uk/massproduction.html

2/3

11/26/2015

MassProduction.PreWarHousing

WebsitebySiriusDigitalLtd(http://www.siriusdigital.co.uk)

http://www.prewarhousing.org.uk/massproduction.html

3/3