Division of Labour vs Division of Labourers

Context: 

Division of labour is one of the most phenomenal things to have happened in the human civilization, it has enabled vast productivity/efficiency/performance improvements. But what about division of laborers, isn't that a kind of division of labor.

Division of Laborers: 

First let me understand what is this term. To me I can understand it as dividing society to subdivisions with each subdivision allocated some task. That is something almost all societies do. In India a popular name to it is Caste system which divided society to Vernas.

Each subdivision was meant to do particular tasks but the problem with this division is that it doesn't account for aptitude of a person, competence of a person or interest of a person.

A person's ancestors may have been a Zamadar but he might not be of the same interest but society forces him to continue with the same since he is meant to be in that position ( Karma of the previous Janma(Birth) backing this up).

An interesting read for the same is as below:

http://ccnmtl.columbia.edu/projects/mmt/ambedkar/web/section_4.html

The interesting thing about this division of laborers is that this is not a phenomenon pertinent to India or Asia but to the world in large. To me Dividing society into black and whites and taking blacks as slaves was nothing less than division of laborers.

This social stratification can be best described through 3 layers

Layers of the Job World

Now this is the typical society we live in wherein there are a lot of should be and a lot of well facts.

 While there is no doubt that people should move from one section to another in this 3 layered structure through support of resources (in indian context especially social security which will enable people from 1st category, dreaded jobs to actually target higher up according to their interests, passion).

Also a within shift, legacy shift within a section not based on passions and competency should be avoided. For instance an actor's son becoming and actor, a businessman's son becoming a legal business owner. The reason is being division of laborers is a concept no civil society wants to engage in modern society but still the truth is far away from this realization.

As future managers of organizations I am supposed and have already met a lot of people from the 1st category and can proudly say that I have contributed towards this shift whether by freely advocating right to know processes for workers or pushing them for going for higher education with job.

Though a lot of this categorization is what I agree upon I tend to differ from Professor Prasad's opinion that people in 3rd category shouldn't make shifts within the region, reason being every sphere has a large scope and defining a scope on the basis of a particular profession is too limited.

Let me elaborate: A prime ministers son is not supposed to be a PM even if he has the capabilities. I think the PM today might have struggled a lot for power but this son of his should have enjoyed great authority and could develop a taste for real development probably bringing that security system in which everyone would be competitive and hence bridge the gap between categories.