What might these notations mean? .....

Russell · Post by **Russell** » Tue Jul 04, 2006 2:50 pm

Hi Folks
Agree with the occupational codes idea.

I'm intrigued that a Type Writer is coded 5/2 yet the Typist has no coding at all.
Typists appear to have always been undervalued! Nothing has changed.

Russell

Post by **emanday** » Tue Jul 04, 2006 2:57 pm

OMG - here I go again...

I wonder, (if they are occupation codes - or summat else entirely), who did it, when did they do it and why

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Jul 04, 2006 7:01 pm

Looking at the picture, it seems to me that the word 'Typist' was added in later. A 'Type Writer' was the original term for a person who types.
The later addition of 'Typist' (the up and coming modern term) would be be someone who did not need to add in a code.
My reckoning is that the notations are indeed 'occupation codes'. Many years ago (40+), the dole had big books to classify occupations - down to the last numerical digit.

Dave

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Tue Jul 04, 2006 9:11 pm

emanday wrote:OMG - here I go again...

I wonder, (if they are occupation codes - or summat else entirely), who did it, when did they do it and why

Over the months and years immediately the census the enumeration books were used to produce all sorts of statistical data, including numbers of those in various occupations. I suspect that what you are seeing here is the result of a clerk coding the occupations.

David

Post by **emanday** » Tue Jul 04, 2006 11:46 pm

You folks are better than aspirin $\:D/$

nelmit · Post by **nelmit** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:33 am

emanday wrote:You folks are better than aspirin $\:D/$

I wish I had not looked at this thread because ma heid's burstin'!!!

I agree re occupations but....................

Annette M

DavidWW · Post by **DavidWW** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:36 am

nelmit wrote:
emanday wrote:You folks are better than aspirin $\:D/$
I wish I had not looked at this thread because ma heid's burstin'!!!

I agree re occupations but....................

Annette M

Hi Annette M

But whit

David

Post by **emanday** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 11:04 am

C'mon nelmit...

but what

here I go - diggin oot the aspirin again

nelmit · Post by **nelmit** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:18 pm

DavidWW wrote:
nelmit wrote:
emanday wrote:You folks are better than aspirin $\:D/$
I wish I had not looked at this thread because ma heid's burstin'!!!

I agree re occupations but....................

Annette M
Hi Annette M

But whit

David

Oops sorry I did not receive notification of new post.

Nothing mind blowing I just can't find a total logic as to how he/she arrived at the numbers noted. I think I'll have a look at the pages round about when I'm next at The Mitchell (or have you done that David?)

I can understand that let's say -the weaving industry could be 18 and each job within that is given a number ie Power Loom Tenter 18/5 and Cloth Finisher 18/6.
But what about Woollens (representative) 5/1 and Salesman (woollens) 18/7.

Hopefully someone has worked it all out by now. I'm definitely thinking of folowing up Dave's info on dole books.

I'm away for a paracetamol.

Annette M

Post by **emanday** » Wed Jul 05, 2006 12:24 pm

OMG - I've caused an epidemic

...