Is the ‘lump of labour’ a self-evident fallacy? The case of Great Britain

Abstract

This article discusses the notion of a ‘lump of labour fallacy’ used since the end of the nineteenth century and more strongly over the recent period in order to criticise the idea that the number of jobs in an economy is fixed. Examining the recent literature using this notion, the article shows that the lump of labour fallacy is more often used as an assumption rather than examined in-depth. Despite a lack of empirical evidence, it became a key argument in the British debate, used, for instance, to justify an increase in the retirement age. From a critical point of view, the article concludes that an in-depth evaluation of the way the number of jobs varies still needs to be done, looking particularly at the evolution of working time.