ABSTRACT
In reappraising the usefulness and validity of dual labor market theory, it is important to remember that it remains, first and foremost, historically grounded. Contrary to neoclassical theories of the labor market that portends to develop timeless and spaceless conceptualizations, dual labor market theory was formulated originally to describe US labor markets at a particular moment in their historical development. The use of the terms professionalization and paraprofessionalization is not meant to mystify the transformation under way, nor is it meant to imply that everyone has or will achieve the social status of a Wall Street lawyer or a brain surgeon. Barry Bluestone and his colleagues were among the first to point out the emerging contradictions within dual labor market theory, especially in regard to the basic linkages between the core economy and primary job segments on the one hand and the peripheral economy and secondary job segments on the other.
