73 74 75

Type of Housing preferred

Miners and housewives were asked, “If you were to move, what kind of house would you prefer?” An answer was obtained to this question even if the informant had said he did not wish to move. If the informant was satisfied with the house he was occupying at the moment, that type of house was recorded.

One-storey, semi-detached houses were the most popular, with two-storey, semi-detached houses occupying second place in popularity. Few said they would like a flatted house, a miners’ row or a tenement. It will be seen from the following Diagram that the preferences of the total miners and housewives samples were almost identical, except that, while a small proportion of miners preferred a tenement, this was mentioned by hardly any housewives.

Housewives Miners

Tenement

A good Miners' row

Flatted house (4 in block)

Semi-detached, 2 Storey

Semi-detached, 1 storey

Percentage

DIAGRAM 33 : Miners and Housewives- “If you were to move what kind of house would you prefer?”

The preference for the single-storey, semi-detached house increased with age among the housewives, although this tendency was not so clear amongst the miners. On the other hand, fewer of the older housewives and older miners wanted a two-storey semi-detached house. These differences may possible be due-

Similarly, the proportion who preferred a flatted house was greatest in the younger and the older age-groups, and least in the middle age-groups. As with the semi-detached house, some young married people without children no doubt feel that a flatted house is adequate to their needs, as it might also be for older people, while the middle age-groups would tend more often to have children, for whom a flatted house would be less satisfactory.

Housewives Miners

Semi detached 1 storey

Semi detached 2 storey

Flatted House (4 in block)

A good miners’ row

Tenement

DIAGRAM 34 : Miners and Housewives “If you were to move what kind of house would you prefer?” By Age

A regional analysis showed that the demand for a single-storey, semi-detached house was at much the same level among both housewives and miners for all regions, with the exception of Lothian, where the demand for this type of house was greater among both sexes. Both miners and housewives in Fifeshire preferred a two-storey, semi-detached house more often than those in other regions. Flatted houses were more popular with both sexes in the Central coalfield than elsewhere. A miners’ row was most popular in Ayrshire, although the total number preferring this was very small. . The following Diagram illustrates these regional differences.

Fife, Clackmannan

Lothian

Central

Ayr

Housewives Miners

Semi detached 1 storey

Semi detached 2 storey

Flatted House (4 in block)

A good miners’ row

Tenement

DIAGRAM 35 : Miners and housewives. “If you went to move, what kind of house would you prefer?” By region

When housing preferences were analysed by the Housing Index score, some interesting differences became apparent. The two most important preferences for one and two-storey semi-detached houses - are shown in the following Diagram for both miners and housewives, analysed by the Housing Index score:

1 storey, semi-detached

2 storey, semi-detached

Housewives Miners

Housing Index Score

70-79

60-69

50-59

40-49

30-39

20-29

Percentage

DIAGRAM 36 : Miners and Housewives those who would like a 1 or 2 storey semi-detached house, if they were to move. By Housing Index Score.

It seems that a preference for a single-storey, semi-detached house was greatest amongst those whose present house was given a medium score on the Index, On the other hand, a preference for a two-storey, semi-detached house was more common amongst those with a high or low score. Housing preferences were almost identical amongst those with the highest and the lowest Housing Index scores. It should be noted, however, that this pattern was not quite so marked among the housewives as among the miners.

Certain factors possibly account for this pattern. First, those scoring highest on their present house may to a large extent be those who already live in two-storey semi-detached houses, since these generally score higher on the Index. If they were good houses, their occupants might be satisfied with them, and would want the same type of house if they were to move. This is confirmed in part by an analysis showing the distribution of detached and semi-detached houses according to the Index score. This shows that the majority of these houses (84%) were amongst those scoring between 60 and 90:

Secondly, those in low-scoring houses might tend to compare their present conditions with the best they have seen, and might mention these as the preferred type of housing. Finally, those living in houses with medium scores might be those at present living in fairly satisfactory single-storey dwellings with which they were more or less satisfied.

Gardens

Miners and housewives were asked what form of garden space they would prefer. The majority said that they would prefer a small, separate garden:

Quite a considerable proportion of the sample, however, preferred a large separate garden.

Age analysis showed that in both sexes the desire for a small garden increased, and the desire for a large garden decreased, in the oldest age-group (60-69):

The slight increase in preference for a large garden in the 50-59 age-group may be due to a desire for home cultivation after retirement from the mines.

Analysis by the Housing Index score does not show any consistent tendency, except for a decrease in preference for a large separate garden amongst miners living in houses with a high Index score.

76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

Attitudes to present environment

Miners and housewives were asked, “Are there any things about this place that you like?” A majority of both sexes said “Yes”, rather more miners than housewives giving this answer:

Age analysis showed that as age increased a larger proportion said they thought there were things they liked:

Analysis by town showed that miners consistently gave more favourable answers (except in Dalkeith) than the housewives. Miners and housewives in Dalkeith also gave most frequently a favourable answer; answers were least favourable in Shotts and Striling. Favourable answers were also common amongst miners in Ayrshire (Annbank) and Dalmellington.

Those who said that there were some things about their neighbourhood which they liked were then asked what it was that they liked:

Housewives Miners

Near relatives, friends

Used to it

Other facilities, shops etc:

Have a good house, garden etc:

Like, used to the people

Easy access to the other places, transport

Social and recreational facilities

Healthy, fresh air etc:

Like it, good village etc:

Born, brought up here

Accessibility to country etc:

Percentage

DIAGRAM 37 : Miners and Housewives: “What things do you like about this place?” (More than one answer was possible to this question)

No single factor was mentioned by all, or a majority, of the sample. Accessibility to the country, healthiness of the place, and fresh air, however, were together mentioned by more of both miners and housewives than any other factor.

An important factor mentioned by approximately equal proportions of both miners and housewives was indicated by the response, “born, brought up, here”; and to these can probably be added those who said, “like, used to, the people, “used to it, “ and “Near relatives and friends, “ - all of which taken together account for about 40% of both samples. It will be noticed that social and recreational facilities are far more important to miners than to housewives.

Two general facts appear to emerge from this analysis. Satisfaction among Scottish miners and their housewives with their present environment appears to be the result (i) of the pleasant and healthy rural surroundings of many mining settlements; and (ii) of familiarity with, and vague liking of, the place and its people. Other, more specific factors were mentioned, but they appear to be of small importance in comparison with those just mentioned, although those who spoke of their “vague liking” etc., may, of course, have been influenced unconsciously by other, special characteristics of their neighbourhood.

Analysis by age of the things liked is shown in the following Table:

(The percentage totals are more than 100 because more than one answer was possible to this question.)

It appears from these figures (although the differences are often not large) that, as might, have been expected, those characteristics of the neighbourhood which require mobility for their full enjoyment are less important among older people, Thus, the importance of access to other places, accessibility to the country, social and recreational facilities, etc., decreased in all cases as the age of the miner and the housewife increased. Even appreciation of healthy surroundings and clean air decreased in the oldest age-group of miners. On the other hand, factors which indicate increasing accommodation and adjustment to the environment, such as being “born to the place,”, or “used to it”, satisfaction with existing housing, and vague general approval of the neighbourhood and its people, were slightly, but consistently, more important among the older miners and housewives.

Both samples were also asked if there were anything about their neighbour hood which they disliked. While a large proportion mentioned things they disliked, it is interesting that about half of both miners and housewives could mention nothing they disliked:

It was slightly more common for housewives (50%) than for miners (45%) to say that there were things they disliked; and this tendency is clear throughout the age-groups, becoming increasingly marked in the 50-59 and the 60-69 age-groups:

Housewives Miners

60-69

50-59

40-49

30-39

20-29

DIAGRAM 38 : Miners and Housewives: “If there is anything about this place you dislike?” By Age

Those miners and housewives who said that they disliked certain aspects of their neighbourhood were asked to specify what things these were. The following Diagram illustrates the responses to this question:

Housewives Miners

Bad roads, lighting etc:

Remote from central town etc:

Industry declining:

Dislike whole place

Other reasons

Poor shopping facilities

Don’t like people, bad types etc:

Pit, slag heaps, smoke etc:

Planning, layout

Look social and recreational facilities.

Bad lack of houses.

DIAGRAM 39 : Miners and Housewives- “what things do you dislike about this place? “

The points mentioned more often by miners were “pits, slag heaps, smoke etc. “ “planning and layout”, and “lack of social and recreational facilities”, which was mentioned by almost twice as many miners (39%) as housewives (20%), It will be remembered that a larger proportion of miners than housewives had also mentioned social and recreational facilities as one of the things they liked about their neighbourhood. *

Lack of houses, and bad houses, was an important point of complaint with both miners and housewives, but the proportion of housewives mentioning this was greater by 10% than the proportion of miners. “Poor shopping facilities” was mentioned, as might have been expected, by a much larger proportion of housewives than miners; and they commented more frequently upon their dislike of the people in their neighbourhood than did the miners.

The analysis by age showed no variations of importance except for those complaining of housing and of social and recreational facilities:

A greater proportion of housewives than miners at all ages complained of bad housing; but it is interesting that, while this complaint occurred less frequently amongst the middle age-groups of the housewives, in the same age groups in the miners' sample, housing was complained of more frequently. Social and recreational facilities were complained of less frequently with age, although the proportion of miners commenting on this was higher in all age-groups than the proportion of housewives.

Analysis by town of the proportions who said that there were, or that there were not things which they disliked about their neighbourhood gave the following results:

Dalkeith appeared to have the highest proportion of both housewives and miners who said that there were some things they disliked. However, the small numbers involved here make the percentage comparisons of doubtful dependability.

It is of some importance to know the extent to which like or dislike of the neighbourhood influenced miners and housewives in their willingness to migrate, and to stay in the mining industry. Answers to the preceding questions on things liked and disliked were therefore analysed by the answers to the earlier questions on willingness to move and willingness to remain in mining. *

Housewives were asked, “Would you be prepared to move, if reasonable housing conditions were offered, to another part of Scotland?” Among both those who were, and those who were not, prepared to move, the majority said that there were things about their present neighbourhood which they liked. At the same time, a considerably greater proportion of those who were not willing to move said that there were things they liked about their neighbourhood.

Similarly, those who were uncertain whether they would be willing to move to another part of Scotland were dominantly those who liked something about their present neighbourhood:

This was confirmed, in the contrary sense, by an analysis by the question, “Are there any things about this place that you dislike?”

It appears, then, that the majority of the housewives who were not willing to move were influenced in this decision either by the fact they liked some aspects of their present neighbourhood, or merely that they could think of nothing they disliked about it (although this factor was of less importance than the former). The majority of those who said they would move also disliked things about their neighbourhood - yet an equal proportion said there were certain things they liked. There is thus no complete correlation between dislike of the present neighbourhood and willingness to move. What can justifiably be said is that among housewives willing to move, the things about their neighbourhood they disliked outweighed those they liked (although it would, have been quite possible to be willing to move without feeling any dislike for the present neighbourhood). The reverse holds good of those who would not move.

Turning now to the miners, these were asked, “If there are different jobs’ going after the war, do you think you will stay in mining, or go into another industry?” About 10% more of those who liked some things about their neighbourhood said they would stay in mining than said they would go into another industry:

Similarly, fewer of those who disliked things about their neighbourhood were prepared to stay in mining than of those who said there was nothing they disliked. In this case, the difference was much greater - 27%:

Miners were also asked, “Would you rather stay here but go into factory work, or move to another mine in another place?” More (12%) of those who said there was nothing about their neighbourhood they liked were prepared to move to another mine than of those who said that there were things they liked:

Similarly, a slightly larger proportion (8%) of those miners who said there were things about their neighbourhood which they disliked were prepared to move to another mine in another place:

It seems then, that satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the present neighbourhood is a factor of quite considerable importance in miners’ decisions as to whether they will stay in, or leave, the mining industry.

All miners and housewives were then asked, “What do you consider the most important improvement needed in this place?”. The most common answers to this, as to the previous question, were those stressing the need for better housing and better social and recreational facilities. The sex differences here are much the same as before. Other needs were each mentioned by only a small proportion of the sample:

(The percentage totals are greater than 100 because more than one answer was possible to this question.)

Age analysis showed that, among both miners and housewives, housing and recreational facilities were mentioned less frequently with age. Better health and recreational facilities for children were suggested most commonly in the middle age-groups, 30-39 and 40-49 - presumably because these more frequently had children who would benefit from such improvements. The introduction of new industries was suggested, contrary to expectation, least frequently by the youngest age-group.

The proportion who could not make any suggestion for improvement increased with age.

Suggested improvements varied considerably from town to town-variations due, no doubt, to the different facilities and amenities existing in each. In all towns, however, improvements in housing and in social and recreational facilities, were the items most often mentioned. Summing up, then, it seems that a majority of both miners and housewives (although fewer of the latter) said that there were things they liked about their present neighbourhood. This satisfaction was largely due to the pleasant rural surroundings, and to familiarity with and vague liking of the place and its people. The presence or absence of social and recreational facilities was more important to miners than to housewives. Although about half of both miners and housewives (and this proportion increased with age) could mention nothing they disliked about their present neighbourhood, the most common complaints amongst the remainder concerned housing and bad recreational and social facilities. There was no complete correlation between dislike of the present neighbourhood and willingness to move. But those who were willing to move disliked things more often, and those not willing less often, although many of those willing to move also liked things in their present neighbourhood.

85 87 88 89

Miners’ Preferences for a Mixed or a dominantly Mining Community

Miners were asked, “Would you prefer to live in a town where the main industry is mining, or in a town where there are several other industries as well?” Two-thirds said that they would prefer a mixed industrial area:

Analysis by the proportion of miners in the total working population showed that areas with 25-50% of the working population in mining had most preferring a mixed industrial area, while areas with over 50% mining had a larger proportion preferring a mixed community than areas with up to 25% in mining:

The following Diagram shows the age differences in the response to this question:

Mixed Industries

Mining

No answer, don't know

20-29

30-39

40-49

50-59

60-69

DIAGRAM 40 : Miners – “Would you prefer to live in a town where the main industry is mining, or in a town where there are several industries as well?” By Age

It is clear that a stated preference for a mixed industrial community occurred less frequently as the age of the miner increased. On the other hand, preference for a dominantly mining community remained more or less stable throughout the age-groups, except for the oldest, where a dominantly mining community was preferred by a considerably greater proportion of miners. It is important to note, however, the large proportion who gave no answer, or who said “don’t know”. There was a marked increase in these two groups taken together in the later age-groups, and in the oldest, 60-69, age-group, it reached 41% of the total. Except in the oldest age-group, however, those who said they preferred a mixed industrial community in all cases exceeded those who preferred mining only and those who gave no answer, added together. There can be no doubt, therefore, that the majority preference is for a mixed industrial community.

There was a marked difference of opinion as between one town and another in regard to this question. It seems that a preference for mixed industries was most commonly expressed in Musselburgh, and least frequently in Stirling:

Those answering this question were also asked to give their reasons for their preference. The answer are shown in the following Diagram:

Those preferring a mining town

Greater Opportunity for a getting job

Other reasons

No answer

Used to mining, know no other trade

Those preferring a mixed industrial town

Other reasons

No answer

More scope, better jobs than mining

Alternative jobs in times of unemployment

Variety of jobs for children etc;

Variety of jobs for self, more choice

Percentage

DIAGRAM 41 : Miners – Reasons for preferring a dominantly mining or a mixed industrial town.

The majority (58%) of those who said they preferred a dominantly mining town said they preferred it because they were used to mining, or because they knew no other trade. The only other reason commonly given was that there would be greater opportunity in such a town for finding a job. It will be noticed that these reasons are based upon the assumption that the individual concerned would stay in mining. On the other hand, all the reasons given by those who preferred a mixed industrial town were based on the assumption that the miner concerned, or his children, would at some juncture leave mining to enter some other occupation.

However, the purpose of this question was to determine the miner’s view of the industrial prospects in each of the two types of area, and it was no doubt answered in that sense. Another question was therefore asked of the miner, the object of which was to determine his preference, from the point of view of social satisfaction, for a mixed or dominantly mining community. Here the stress was upon people rather than jobs.

The following table shows that, while the preference of the majority was still for a mixed community, the proportion who preferred a dominantly mining community was larger than in the preceding question:

Thus, while only 8% said * they preferred a town whose industry was dominated by mining, 29% said they would prefer to live in a community composed mainly of miners. This provides some reason for optimism. The majority of the miners, it is true, prefer a mixed community- nor is this surprising in view of their frequently expressed dislike of mining life. On the other hand, the minority preferring a mainly mining community is quite considerable, particularly when the large proportion (27%) giving no answer is borne in mind. It suggests that in spite of everything many miners enjoy living with their fellow workers. This manifestation of some degree of social solidarity amongst miners, despite their antagonism to the occupation in general, may mean that something still persists upon which a satisfied mining community may be built.

There was little difference between expanding and declining areas, although slightly more in the former preferred a mixed community. There were some age differences, however, the older-age-groups having a smaller proportion preferring a mixed community:

Mixed Industries

Prefer a mixed community

Don't know

20-29

30-39

40-49

50-59

60-69

AGE

DIAGRAM 42 : Miners – “Would you prefer to live in a place where most of the people are miners, or where there are many different sorts of people:,” By Age.

It will be noticed that a large proportion of all age-groups said "Don t know” to this question, and that the decline in the proportion preferring a mixed community was not equalled by the increase in the proportion preferring a dominantly mining community.

Differences between towns in the response to this question were as follows, with Wemyss having the largest (75%) and Annbank the smallest (27%) proportion preferring a mixed community. In all towns except Wemyss a large proportion said “don’t know”.

Miners were also asked to give their reasons for their preference:

Mostly Miners

Other Reasons

Like Miners

Like it, born to it, used to miners

Feel sense of solidarity

Mixed Community

More attractive salary

Other reasons

Miners rough

Miners too clannish, narrow

More variety of social life etc:

Percentage

DIAGRAM 43 : Miners. “Why do you prefer a mixed, or dominantly mining, community?”

The dominant reason given by those preferring a mixed community was the prospect of the more varied social life which would be possible in such a community. Very few preferred it because of a dislike of miners as such. As might be expected, those who preferred a dominantly mining community did so because they liked miners.

Summing up once again, the results of the inquiry show that about two-thirds of the miners preferred to live in a town where there were several other industries in addition to mining, and that this was more popular among the young than the older miners. The proportion of miners who preferred a dominantly mining town was more or less constant throughout the age-groups. This was apparently preferred because those concerned felt a certain social solidarity with the mining community and preferred the society of miners. On the other hand, the majority who preferred a mixed community apparently did so not only because of the more varied social life which it would afford, but also (and this is probably more important) because such a town would afford greater opportunity for leaving the mining industry.

90

Social relationships of miners and housewives

Finally, two questions were asked of miners and housewives, whose purpose was to discover to what extent their social life was bound up with other members of the mining community, or with members of the non-mining community. They were asked first, “Whom do you visit most? Are they members of a mining family?” More than two-thirds said that those they visited most were members of a mining family:

Considerably more in the declining than in the expanding areas visited mining families most:

Those living in dominantly mining communities visited more often other mining families than those living in mixed communities, although this was more noticeable among housewives than among miners

Similarly, those areas with a larger proportion of miners in the total working population also, as might be expected, had a larger proportion who visited other mining families most frequently.

Analysis by age showed that while fewer, with increasing age, said they visited another mining family most, the proportion who visited non-mining families showed no tendency to increase with age. The difference is accounted for by the considerable increase, with age, of those who said they did not visit at all:

Secondly, miners and housewives were asked if the person they went out with most was a member of a mining family. Here again, the great majority said they went out most with a member of a mining family:

It will be observed that more housewives (13%) than miners (9%) went out with non-mining people.

As in the preceding question, it was more common in declining than in expanding areas, in dominantly mining than in mixed communities, and in areas having a greater proportion of miners in the working population, for miners and housewives to enjoy these social relationships with members of other mining families.

91

Conclusions

1. An important point which emerges from this Part is the widespread desire amongst both miners and housewives that their comparative isolation from the rest of economic and social life should come to an end. In view of the data in preceding Parts which showed the common desire of miners to leave the industry, it is perhaps not surprising that a majority of them should prefer a mixed rather than a dominantly mining industrial area to work in. Such an area would clearly, as many of them said, provide greater opportunity for alternative employment. What is perhaps less expected, in view of the tradition (and some evidence in this Part indicates that this solidarity is still of some importance) of group solidarity amongst miners, is the majority who said they would prefer a mixed community rather than one dominated by miners -the majority preferring this because of the more varied social life which it would make possible. Less than one-third said they preferred a community dominantly composed of miners.

These preferences, for a mixed industrial area, and a mixed occupational community, may be the result of either, or both, of two trends of miners’ opinion. At best, it suggests that miners and their wives, discontented with the social isolation which they have suffered, now wish to move into the main stream of social and economic life, while remaining in the mining industry. At worst (and, since there is much other data to confirm it, this seems more likely) miners prefer a mixed industrial and occupational community because it may provide the means of final escape from the mining life.

If this is the case, the planner is placed in a dilemma. A new community planned solely for miners is likely to increase their discontent. A mixed community, while reducing discontent, does so only because miners are thereby enabled more easily to leave the industry. The best solution may lie in the provision of mixed communities in which miners can find their place, while at the same time other means are employed to encourage the miner to stay in his occupation.

2. A large proportion of both miners and housewives explained their satisfaction with their existing environment, on vague grounds of familiarity, and the presence of their friends and relatives in the neighbourhood. This may be of importance in the planning of migration to the new Scottish mining townships. It is probable that greater social satisfaction among the migrants might be achieved if the movement were organised on the basis, not only of family, but neighbourhood, groups.

3. It appears to be of considerable importance to the miner that the place where he works is set in a rural area, with all that this means in the way of pleasant surrounding countryside, fresh air and a generally healthy environment. No doubt these are of particular importance to a man who works below the surface, where sunshine, fresh air and healthy conditions are absent, or at a minimum. It seems likely that this need should be taken into account in the planning of new mining areas.

4. That unpleasant environment is of considerable importance in deciding the miner to leave the industry is clear from data presented in this Part. Conversely, those who are satisfied with their present neighbourhood appear more often amongst those who are prepared to stay in the mining industry. These results underline the importance for future recruitment to mining of properly planned mining townships in accordance with the needs and preferences of the miners themselves.