How Far Do You Agree That The Status Of Workers In Russia From 1855-1964

How far do you agree that the lives of workers changed in Russia to a large extent between 1855 and 1964? Without doubt, workers lives showed a considerable amount of change from 1855-1964. However, there were also large degrees of continuity so the extent of this change can be questioned. The status of workers changed in two main eras; Stalin’s rule and Witte’s industrialisation. Despite this, the status of workers stayed more level in 1892-1964, suggesting a large amount of continuity. Working conditions were another aspect of workers lives that fluctuated tremendously. Under Witte’s industrialisation, working conditions changed and they continued to worsen until the arrival of Khrushchev in 1954, where he introduced laws to improve …show more content…
He fuelled a period of massive industrialisation which ultimately lead to the emergence of a new social group; the urban proletariat. This group, who had little status in Russian society in the period 1854-1894, now played a major role in Russia, meaning a change in an average workers status. By 1914, there were 2.9 million workers employed in Russia working in 24,900 factories. However, this period comes with a degree of continuity in the level of status of workers; in 1910 only half of Russia’s national productivity was industrial. This points in the general direction that, as with the reigns of Alexander the II and III, the peasants were the social class with more power. The provisional government of February 1917 marked a change for the status of workers in Russia. It was formed with the Petrograd soviet, a council of workers and soldiers. They controlled the railway, postal and telegraph services; a level of status in which workers had previously never held. During Lenin’s rule, there were varying degrees of workers status: ‘While the peasantry suffered between 1918 and 1921, the urban workers became better off…The NEP clearly benefited the peasantry at the expense of urban workers’1. This quote from Lee can be challenged, as during war communism 1918 the populations of Moscow dropped by half. This shows that workers …show more content…
Some small change came under war communism in 1918. The town houses of the rich were taken over and the living space divided amongst poor families, which meant that the select few benefited from the Bolshevik rule. This aspect can be seen as an improvement when looking at the living conditions endured under the Tsarist period. Because there had been little workers before Witte’s industrialisation, the population of cities dramatically expanded. This expansion had not been organised or supervised, meaning that the facilities accommodating the influx of workers were inadequate. Between 1881 and 1914, workers were overcrowded in insanitary wooden tenements with poor health services and this continued in World War One. Disruption of supplies meant little fuel and a shortage of food. These living conditions can be seen as a change compared to Tsarist Russia as the urban proletariat had barely developed in this era, so they would have not endured overcrowding. In 1917, this series of bad working conditions were set to continue. Sanitary conditions were appalling and fuel for heating was again short. Less than a third of diet came from state provided rations and food prices rocketed in 1919, this resulted in a large scale desertion of towns in favour of the country side. Under Stalin, there was a large degree of continuity for working conditions. Stalin, however, would disagree: ‘Life has become