Trim Size: 170mm x 244mm Scott wbieoc059.tex V1 - 07/09/2016 5:03 P.M.

Page 1

Dirty Work
AMIN MAKKAWY
California State University, Fresno, USA

CLIFF SCOTT
University of North Carolina, Charlotte, USA

Dirty work refers to a type of work that is viewed as involving physical, social, and/or
moral filth (Hughes, 1951). Using this widely accepted definition of dirty work, many
occupations involve job related tasks that could be classified under the dirty work
umbrella. Examples include farmhands, firefighters, police officers, dentists, plumbers,
construction workers, coroners, prison guards, social workers, public defenders,
homeless shelter operators, shoe shiners, barbers, lift operators, exotic dancers, bail
bond sales specialists, bill collectors, and parking enforcement officers. Studying
dirty work and “dirty workers” not only is fundamental to a better understanding of
this type of labor but also can be used to gain insights regarding general interests in
the field of organizational communication. In essence, dirty work provides scholars
with a unique arena to explore communication processes as they traverse societal,
professional, organizational, and individual levels in the continuous interplay between
identity development, stigmatization, and organization.
It is important to note that the concept of dirty work is, at its crux, a societally defined
category of work that hinges on ever-changing categorizations of what is clean or dirty,
what groups are normal or stigmatized, and/or what is moral or immoral. Using West-
ern societal definitions and heavily influenced by the classification provided by Hughes
(1951) and explicated by Ashforth and Kreiner (1999), work classified as dirty is con-
ducted under harsh or dangerous physical conditions (extreme heat or cold, dust, dark),
is made possible or necessary by the existence of harsh physical conditions (involves
removing trash, handling homicides, removing waste from water), involves a servile
relationship to others, includes interactions with socially stigmatized groups (prison-
ers, the elderly and disabled, the sick), involves the conduct of tasks that are societally
defined as immoral (prostitution, drug dealing, unlawful activities), and/or involves the
use of patterns of human interaction that are defined as uncivilized or unacceptable by
greater society (e.g., deception, trickery). The classification of dirty work is thus not
static, and must be considered in a historical and societal context. In addition, it is not
necessary that these occupations consist completely of dirty work; rather, at least one of
the primary tasks that those involved in these occupations must fulfill should be clas-
sified as dirty work. For example, a dentist’s primary job task is to correct or enhance
aspects of their clients’ teeth. In order to do this, the dentist must use his or her hands

The International Encyclopedia of Organizational Communication. Craig R. Scott and Laurie K. Lewis (General Editors),
James R. Barker, Joann Keyton, Timothy Kuhn, and Paaige K. Turner (Associate Editors).
© 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2017 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Trim Size: 170mm x 244mm Scott wbieoc059.tex V1 - 07/09/2016 5:03 P.M. Page 2

2 DI R T Y WO R K

along with special tools to work inside the patient’s mouth. This need to work inside
the human mouth would be considered dirty work, while the occupation of dentistry
consists of many other tasks that would not be classified as dirty work. Similarly, fire-
fighters may be regarded in the United States as “America’s heroes” in spite of the lesser
known fact that much of the work that many firefighters do in larger cities is socially and
physically tainted (Tracy & Scott, 2006). The term “dirty work” was originally coined
by Hughes (1951); the concept has since evolved from a categorization of work to a
paradigm of work, and conceptions of dirty work and the dirty worker have developed
in the field of organizational communication as topics of scholarly interest. As a con-
cept, dirty work has also been examined in the general quest to understand how the
meanings of tainted work are managed and how these communicative processes reflect,
reinforce, and occasionally modify relations between organization and society.

Dirty worker identity and taint management tactics

Central to the concept of dirty work is the dirty worker. He or she not merely rep-
resents an individual employee with unique characteristics but also enacts a persona
denoting membership in an identity group, the meanings of which are simultaneously
negotiated by society at large and the individual dirty worker. Social identity theory is
especially fitting to this task, as it takes into account both individual motives regard-
ing identity formation and societal and group influences on this identity formation.
Decades of ethnographic work have highlighted how dirty workers may contest and
reframe the socially accepted meanings of their work (e.g., that bill collectors portray
themselves not as immoral actors who harass and lie to debtors but rather as providing a
service that benefits borrowers by keeping lending costs low) through communication
strategies that characterize ostensibly dirty work as dignified and necessary (Ashforth &
Kreiner, 1999), often by developing shared interpretations of specific workplace events
(Tracy, Myers, & Scott, 2006; Tracy & Scott, 2006). Although dirty workers may be stig-
matized by some, identity work with others in their occupation can be beneficial in
recasting this identity in more positive terms. Dirty workers employ a range of specific
identity management tactics to promote positive self-identity. Indeed, contrary to the
societal construction of the dirty worker as one who is associated with various forms of
filth, many dirty workers ironically report high levels of occupational esteem and pride
(Thompson, 1991).
Scholars of virtually all stripes acknowledge that dirty workers use communication
to redefine their work. Ashforth and Kreiner (1999) have suggested this communica-
tion occurs in an ongoing fashion through techniques of reframing, recalibration, and
refocusing.
Reframing involves changing the implicit meanings attached to an occupation via
either infusing or neutralizing the negative aspects of dirty work. Infusing dirty work
with positive meaning is often completed via framing the occupation in positive abstract
terminology that ignores the concrete and dirty aspects of the job. Closely related to
Trim Size: 170mm x 244mm Scott wbieoc059.tex V1 - 07/09/2016 5:03 P.M. Page 3

DI R T Y WO R K 3

infusing, neutralizing involves ignoring the dirty aspects of this work via similar refram-
ing techniques. Emergency room nurses might ignore the dirty work they must com-
plete when discussing their occupation with others (neutralizing) and claim instead
that they provide invaluable services that at the end of the day play key roles in overall
patient health (infusing). For example, Thompson, Harred, and Burks (2003) demon-
strate how exotic dancers use language that characterizes their occupation as bringing
society a valuable and educational service as opposed to the competing ideology that
these professions consist of bodies for sale.
Recalibrating dirty work involves altering the emphasis on specific tasks conducted
as part of the occupation. Dirtier aspects of the occupation are de-emphasized and/or
transformed into aspects of the occupation that are only essential as a means to a more
positively perceived end. Dentists must work in the mouths of their patients with their
hands in order to promote general health and well-being as well as reducing present
and/or potential oral dysfunction. A dentist, then, is likely to characterize his or her
occupation as primarily focused on the abstract concept of promoting oral health as
opposed to the concrete image of using hands to work inside the mouth. Recalibra-
tion can also be seen in storytelling accounts dirty workers produce as they discuss
their occupation. Stories regarding work focus on heroic tasks, dirty tasks as essen-
tial parts of larger valuable goals, and the reinforcement of the nondirty aspects of
this work (Tracy & Scott, 2006). For example, hospital janitorial staff may promote
an understanding of their seemingly low-status job as an essential part of the smooth
operation of the health care facility and as key to the successful completion of medical
procedures.
Refocusing is a tactic largely composed of ignoring the dirty aspects of dirty work. As
the focus is shifted to positive aspects of the occupation, the dirty aspects are made less
salient. For example, Scott and Tracy (2007) observed that when firefighters engaged
in the telling of work related storytelling, they focused on stories that emphasized the
firefighter as hero and savior, while de-emphasizing less heroic aspects of firefighting
like responding to “frequent fliers” who make repeated 911 calls for invalid reasons.
In addition to explaining the interactive strategies dirty workers use to recast the
meaning of their work in ways that affirm positive identity, theories of dirty work
have also attempted to account for the effort required to carry them out. Conservation
of resources theory has been used to understand the amount of effort and cognitive
resources that dirty workers utilize in producing a positive identity. The greater the
perceived stigma associated with a dirty work task, the greater the amount of cognitive
resources it will take for an individual to create a positive identity. Consequently, rates
of uncertainty, turnover, and burnout may increase if the societal stigma of dirty work
is not managed (Baran et al., 2012). Thus, it is also important to understand the role
of professional associations and organizations in the process of dirty worker identity
formation. Organizations can promote dialogue regarding dirty work and provide
symbolic resources for dirty workers to reduce the stigma of the dirty tasks that they
conduct, while professional associations can bring together dirty workers to promote
strong professional culture and thus provide a platform for positive social identity
formation (Bickmeier, Lopina, & Rogelberg, 2014).
Trim Size: 170mm x 244mm Scott wbieoc059.tex V1 - 07/09/2016 5:03 P.M. Page 4

4 DI R T Y WO R K

Dirty work: novel approaches

The frameworks described above exemplify the depth of dirty work research in explor-
ing the phenomenon as not just a bundle of undesirable job tasks, but rather a frame-
work for reconstructing the meaning of work as identity affirming. Novel research has
begun to promote our understanding of the impact of dirty worker identity on perfor-
mance and health outcomes (Bickmeier, Lopina, & Rogelberg, 2014); additionally, new
methodologies are being used to investigate dirty work. For example, recent variable
analytic, postpositivistic, research (Baran et al., 2012) has used quantitative measures of
the salience of dirty work tasks and frequency of dirty work tasks on turnover rates and
uncertainty levels, providing stronger causal evidence for claims about the outcomes of
dirty work that have been present in the literature for some time. This approach is in
contrast to the mostly qualitative and interpretive studies conducted on dirty worker
experience in fields such as organizational communication studies.
More than a collection of tasks categorized by societally upheld norms and defini-
tions, the experiences of dirty workers hold unique opportunities for understanding the
formation of strong occupational cultures, identity management processes, and the rela-
tionships among society, occupation, and individual employee experience. As changes
to the psychological contract make professional identity increasingly salient as com-
pared to organizational identity, the focus on the dirty worker both as an individual
and as part of a professional group becomes increasingly important (Drew, Mills, & Gas-
saway, 2007). The social construction of dirty work has been traditionally approached
via an interpretive lens (promoting understandings of the experience of being a dirty
worker) in the field of communication and via a postpositive lens (focused on under-
standing antecedents and outcomes of the dirty worker experience) in the psychology
literature. Although these traditions still hold fast, innovative critical and postmodern
investigations of dirty work are beginning to surface.

Critical and postmodern approaches to dirty work

With critical and postmodern investigations of dirty work, it is possible to transcend the
individual level of analysis and further investigate organizational and societal aspects
of dirty work that intermingle with our understandings of the constructions of gender,
race, and ability in relation to power differentials and hierarchy. In critical understand-
ings of dirty work, research has emphasized a linkage between societally held notions
of masculinity and femininity, with tasks seen as more and less dirty, respectively. For
example, Tracy and Scott (2006) analyzed how firefighters talk about the dirtier aspects
of their work and concluded that interactive taint management drew upon and sus-
tained hegemonic notions of gender that transcend any one organization or occupation.
Firefighters characterized their dirty work via stories that uphold masculine ideals: the
firefighter as a manly hero who storms into buildings to save those in need using his
or her strength and bold character. Conversely, emergency medical services (EMS) that
firefighters also provide were either not discussed or downplayed. Although crucial and
often lifesaving, EMS services were described with talk that reflected and reinforced a
Trim Size: 170mm x 244mm Scott wbieoc059.tex V1 - 07/09/2016 5:03 P.M. Page 5

DI R T Y WO R K 5

feminine ideal of providing compassionate care and empathy toward the health and
well-being of others. Indeed, many negative aspects of dirty work in a range of occu-
pations are associated rhetorically with reified ideologies of femininity. Berry and Bell
(2012), for example, observe that home health nursing – a type of dirty work marked by
its subservience to others and its relationship to societally held feminine ideals – is the
object of fewer federal wage protections than similar occupations dominated by men.
It is possible, then, that dirty work is more closely reliant on tasks that are imbedded
in the traditional feminine ideals of labor (looking after others, cleaning, etc.). Future
research using a critical or postmodern lens might expand on linkages between types
of dirty work and their relationships to the constructions of masculinity and femininity
as well as expand the discussion to relationships between specific types of dirty work
and racial constructions. Moving past this stage, future critical research regarding dirty
work should focus on notions of intersectionality to examine how class, race, and gender
interact to position the individual employee in a dirty work context. Scholars may also
be interested in how this impacts their access to resources used for taint management
and how the confluence of intersecting identities enables and constrains the capacity of
dirty workers to reframe their work through communication.

Dirty work as a factor in interpretation

Although much of the research on dirty work has examined how dirty occupational
identities are recast in positive terms, a few studies have examined how this identity
work shapes not just interpretation of occupational identity but also ambiguous events
and processes in the work environment not directly associated with taint. For example,
scholars have examined the use of humor among dirty workers, concluding that humor
served as a resource not just in reframing occupational identity but also in simultane-
ously crafting identity affirming interpretations of confusing events in the work envi-
ronment (Scott & Tracy, 2007; Tracy, Myers, & Scott, 2006). This line of research has pro-
vided a unique opportunity for scholars to understand how sensemaking can simultane-
ously be used to reduce equivocality while protecting the identity of employees who are
vulnerable to stigma. Aside from the value of gaining a general understanding of how
communication can be used to mold the at-work experience and identity of employees
dealing with stigma, this research can lead to evidence based workplace interventions
that not only affirm positive identity but also improve the efficacy of operations.

Conclusion and future directions

Future research should not only investigate the critical aspects and postmodern con-
struction of dirty work, but should focus on how information technology mediates the
experience of dirty workers and the overall meaning of dirty work. Have new tech-
nologies created new occupations that are categorized as dirty? Do novel approaches
to community formation, as powered by social media networks, have the potential to
transform the experience of dirty workers or enhance the capacity of employees to
Trim Size: 170mm x 244mm Scott wbieoc059.tex V1 - 07/09/2016 5:03 P.M. Page 6

6 DI R T Y WO R K

reframe it? Has information technology made more salient positive and/or negative
aspects of dirty work? These questions and many others currently go unanswered. The
literature not only is seemingly stuck in the interpretive paradigm of investigating dirty
work, but also does not take into account organizational and technological changes that
have the potential to impact the experiences of dirty workers, the meaning of dirty work,
and the relationships between individual dirty workers.
The field of communication studies stands in a unique position to bring great insight
to the conceptualization of dirty work as well as the experiences of dirty workers
as imbedded in interpersonal, organizational, occupational, and societal contexts.
Although the process of recasting dirty work in less stigmatized terms, especially as
depicted in Ashforth and Kreiner’s (1999) influential model, has been understood
as a communicative one, the prevailing theoretical assumptions (e.g., social identity
theory) behind much of this work erroneously suggest that the dirtiness of work is
merely reflected in organizational communication rather than constituted and recon-
stituted by it. Indeed, although communication scholarship has made noteworthy
contributions to the dirty work literature, it would be something of a stretch to suggest
that the potential influence of communication scholarship on practical and scholarly
understandings of dirty work has been realized. Fortunately, communication scholars
already possess conceptual and methodological tools for addressing their lack of
substantial scholarly influence on the topic. For example, discursive and rhetorical
approaches provide tools that allow for a holistic multilevel analysis of dirty work
with the potential to explain how societal notions of taint are invoked, reified, and
occasionally transformed at the level of organizations and through the communicative
process of organizing. Such critical and postmodern work would situate the conceptual
locus of control in communication processes that constitute organizations, societies,
and the groups that comprise them. Quantitative communication research may have
an equally important role to play as well. If dirty work is indeed constituted through
communication, variable analytic work focusing on communication (vs. attitudinal)
variables will be able to demonstrate their ongoing relationship with desired and
undesired outcomes (e.g., forms of occupational taint, occupational identification and
commitment, etc.). Indeed, causal linkages between communication processes of dirty
work (vs. attitudes about dirty work) and such outcomes will need to be examined if a
communication based approach to dirty work is to attract attention among scholars in
other fields.
As proposed by Hughes (1951), the concept of dirty work still remains largely unex-
plored. This is not for a lack of content in the area. To the contrary, existing work opens
further avenues of exploration. Dirty work research has provided organizational com-
munication scholars with a window into the experiences of dirty workers, has assisted
in understanding the essence of dirty work, and has helped expand general theoretical
perspectives of workplace identity construction. It is time for organizational commu-
nication scholars to take the next step in understanding how this particular form of
interactivity constitutes and reconstitutes organizational realities and societal abstrac-
tions. Whether communication scholarship will take up this important task in a manner
suggesting that the discipline has any unique conceptual purchase on the phenomenon
of dirty work remains to be seen.
 Trim Size: 170mm x 244mm Scott wbieoc059.tex V1 - 07/09/2016 5:03 P.M. Page 7

DI R T Y WO R K 7

wbieoc022
SEE ALSO: Clandestine/Hidden Organizations; Class and Organizing; Discursive
wbieoc023 Construction; Invisible Labor and Hidden Work; Identification, Organizational; Iden-
wbieoc063 tity, Individual; Impression Management; Meaningful Work; Culture, Organizational;
wbieoc095 Workplace Dignity
wbieoc100

wbieoc101

wbieoc104 References
wbieoc130

wbieoc155
Ashforth, B. E., & Kreiner, G. E. (1999). “How can you do it?”: Dirty work and the chal-
wbieoc222
lenge of constructing a positive identity. Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 413–434.
doi:10.5465/amr.1999.2202129
Baran, B. E., Rogelberg, S. G., Lopina, E. C., Allen, J. A., Spitzmüller, C., & Bergman, M. E.
(2012). Shouldering a silent burden: The toll of dirty tasks. Human Relations, 65, 597–626.
doi:10.1177/0018726712438063
Berry, D. P., & Bell, M. P. (2012). Gender, race, and class in organizations: Stereotyping, discrim-
ination, and labor law exclusions. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 31(3), 236–248.
Bickmeier, R., Lopina, E. C., & Rogelberg, S. G. (2014). Dirty work, well-being and performance.
In M. Veldhoven & R. Peccei (Eds.), Well-being and performance at work. London, UK: Psy-
chology Press.
Drew, S. K., Mills, M., & Gassaway, B. (2007). Dirty work: The social construction of taint. Waco,
TX: Baylor University Press.
Hughes, E. C. (1951). Work and the self. In J. H. Rohrer & M. Sherif (Eds.), Social psychology at
the crossroad (pp. 313–323). New York, NY: Harper.
Scott, C. W., & Tracy, S. J. (2007). Riding fire trucks and ambulances with America’s heroes. In
S. K. Drew, M. Mills, & B. Gassaway (Eds.), Dirty work: The social construction of taint (pp.
55–75). Waco, TX: Baylor University Press.
Thompson, W. E. (1991). Handling the stigma of handling the dead: Morticians and funeral
directors. Deviant Behavior, 12(4), 403–429. doi:10.1080/01639625.1991.9967888
Thompson, W. E., Harred, J. L., & Burks, B. E. (2003). Managing the stigma of topless dancing:
A decade later. Deviant Behavior, 24, 551–570. doi:10.1080/713840274
Tracy, S. J., & Scott, C. W. (2006). Sexuality, masculinity and taint management among firefighters
and correctional officers: “America’s heroes” and the “scum of law enforcement.” Management
Communication Quarterly, 20, 6–38. doi:10.1177/0893318906287898
Tracy, S. J., Myers, K. M., & Scott, C. W. (2006). Cracking jokes and crafting selves: A multi-site
analysis of humor, sensemaking, and identity management among human service workers.
Communication Monographs, 73, 283–308. doi:10.1080/03637750600889500

Further reading

Bolton, S. C. (2005). Women’s work, dirty work: The gynaecology nurse as “other.” Gender, Work
& Organization, 12(2), 169–186. doi:10.1111/j.1468-0432.2005.00268.x
Bunderson, J. S., & Thompson, J. A. (2009). The call of the wild: Zookeepers, callings, and
the double-edged sword of deeply meaningful work. Administrative Science Quarterly, 54(1),
32–57. doi:10.2189/asqu.2009.54.1.32
Cheney, G., & Lee Ashcraft, K. (2007). Considering “the professional” in communication studies:
Implications for theory and research within and beyond the boundaries of organizational com-
munication. Communication Theory, 17(2), 146–175. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2007.00290.x
Trim Size: 170mm x 244mm Scott wbieoc059.tex V1 - 07/09/2016 5:03 P.M. Page 8

8 DI R T Y WO R K

Dick, P. (2005). Dirty work designations: How police officers account for their use of coercive
force. Human Relations, 58(11), 1363–1390. doi:10.1177/0018726705060242
Kreiner, G. E., Ashforth, B. E., & Sluss, D. M. (2006). Identity dynamics in occupational dirty
work: Integrating social identity and system justification perspectives. Organization Science,
17(5), 619–636. doi:10.1287/orsc.1060.0208
Rivera, K. D. (2015). Emotional taint: Making sense of emotional dirty work at the U.S. Border
Patrol. Management Communication Quarterly, 29, 198–228. doi:10.1177/0893318914554090
Tracy, S. J. (2004). The construction of correctional officers: Layers of emotionality behind bars.
Qualitative Inquiry, 10(4), 509–533. doi:10.1177/1077800403259716
Tracy, S. J., & Trethewey, A. (2005). Fracturing the real-self↔fake-self dichotomy: Moving
toward “crystallized” organizational discourses and identities. Communication Theory, 15(2),
168–195. doi:10.1093/ct/15.2.168
Wrzesniewski, A., & Dutton, J. E. (2001). Crafting a job: Revisioning employees as
active crafters of their work. Academy of Management Review, 26(2), 179–201.
doi:10.5465/amr.2001.4378011

Amin Makkawy is assistant professor of communication studies at California State

University, Fresno. He received his MA in communication studies from the University
of North Carolina at Charlotte in 2014 and his BA in psychology and sociology with
high distinction and honors from the University of Nebraska–Lincoln in 2011. He con-
ducts research on diversity and voice in organizational contexts, and he uses critical and
postmodern approaches to develop new insights about the experiences of people with
disabilities in organizational contexts. His latest research has focused on the experience
of employees with visual impairments in the virtual workplace.
Cliff Scott is associate professor of communication studies and organizational sci-
ence at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. His research examines identity
work, postincident sensemaking, and workplace meetings. He coauthored, with Sarah
Tracy, “Sexuality, masculinity, and taint management among firefighters and correc-
tional officers: Getting down and dirty with America’s heroes and the scum of law
enforcement” in Management Communication Quarterly (2006).
Trim Size: 170mm x 244mm Scott wbieoc059.tex V1 - 07/09/2016 5:03 P.M. Page 9

Please note that the abstract and keywords will not be included in the printed book,
but are required for the online presentation of this book which will be published
on Wiley Online Library (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/). If the abstract and key-
words are not present below, please take this opportunity to add them now.
The abstract should be a short paragraph of between 150– 200 words in length and
there should be 5 to 10 keywords

Abstract
Dirty work is a socially defined classification of labor perceived as physically, socially,
and/or morally undesirable. The construct is defined in depth and discussed in the
context of taint management, employee identity, employee health, and a social construc-
tionist perspective on work. Understanding the experience of dirty workers may pro-
vide valuable insight regarding other aspects of organizational communication, includ-
ing employee identity management, the use of humor at work, and managing social
stigma in the workplace. Directions for future research and the potential benefits of
critical and postmodern perspectives in understanding and investigating dirty work
are also presented.

Keywords

dirty work; identity work; occupational identity; sensemaking