Working-Class Students Split Over New Civil Service Internship Rules
Hey, so there’s this big conversation happening right now about changes to the civil service summer internship scheme in the UK, and it’s really stirring up some mixed feelings among working-class students who want to get into government jobs.
Here’s the gist: the government recently announced reforms to this popular internship program. Basically, from next summer, only students from lower socio-economic backgrounds—meaning those whose parents had certain kinds of working-class jobs when they were 14—will be eligible to apply. The aim is to make the civil service more representative of the society it serves, by encouraging more working-class young people to join. The hope is that having a civil service that better reflects the population will lead to better decision-making and policies.
But this change has divided opinions among the very students it’s supposed to help.
Also Read:- Liverpool’s New Attack Shines but Community Shield Loss Reveals Premier League Warning
- Thousands Affected by Heat-Driven Power Outage in London — Restoration Underway
Take Adam Allen, a 20-year-old sociology and criminology student from the University of Warwick. Before, Adam wasn’t even sure if he had a chance applying because he felt the system favored people with better personal networks or family connections. Neither of his parents went to university, and they worked in factories and warehouses, so he’s clearly from a working-class background. Since the reform, Adam says he now feels encouraged and more confident about applying—he feels like he will finally be taken seriously and not just seen as someone without a real shot.
On the other hand, Nell Ashworth, 21, who studies social policy at the University of York, feels caught in the middle. Her mother is a nurse, and her father is a town planner, so under the new rules, she wouldn’t qualify for the internship despite coming from a state school and working-class roots. Nell’s worried about what this means for students like her, who aren’t considered “working class enough” by these strict criteria. She’s frustrated because she had planned her career path around applying to the internship, and now she feels left out. She understands the government’s aim but feels uncertain about where she fits in and what this means for her future in public service.
Then there’s Hannah Begum from the London School of Economics. She’s from Leeds and grew up with a father who was a handyman and a mother who worked part-time in the community. Hannah sees the reform as a positive step toward giving more people like her—who don’t come from privileged backgrounds—a fair chance. She points out that many of her fellow students at LSE come from wealthy or international backgrounds and don’t understand what life is like outside of London. For Hannah, these changes could open doors and help bring more diverse voices into government roles, especially during tough times like the cost of living crisis.
However, not everyone agrees with these changes. Peter Murphy, 21, a history student at Cambridge, feels personally hurt by the reforms. His father, an immigrant from Ireland, was the first in his family to attend university. Peter loves the idea of working for the civil service as a way to serve his country, but these new rules make him feel excluded, like the country he cares about doesn’t want him anymore. He worries the reform unfairly blocks people based on their background rather than merit, and fears this could deepen divisions rather than bridge them.
So, what’s really happening here is a debate about fairness, opportunity, and how best to make the civil service more inclusive. While the government insists these reforms are about leveling the playing field and creating a workforce that mirrors society, some students feel caught out or pushed aside by the new definitions of “working class.” Others welcome the chance to finally break into a system that has long seemed out of reach.
It’s clear this reform has opened up a lot of questions about identity, privilege, and social mobility—and how the government can genuinely offer equal opportunity without unintentionally shutting out the very people it wants to support.
Read More:
0 Comments