RedStapler
Posts: 62
Joined: 6/15/2010
From: New Jersey
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: domiguy
http://www.alternet.org/story/35398/?comments=view&cID=112702&pID=112573
Discrimination: The Root of the Black Job Crisis
Nearly forty percent of young black males are unemployed. Not by choice; because employers refuse to hire them.
April 24, 2006 |
The battle continues to rage between economists, politicians, immigrants' rights activists, and black anti-immigration activists over whether illegal immigrants are the major cause of double-digit joblessness among poor, unskilled young black males.
But several years before the immigration combatants squared off, then-University of Wisconsin graduate researcher Devah Pager pointed the finger in another direction -- a direction that makes most employers squirm. That's the persistent and deep racial discrimination in the workplace. Pager found that black men without a criminal record are less likely to find a job than white men with criminal records
But in 2005, Pager, now a sociologist at Princeton, duplicated her study. She surveyed nearly 1,500 private employers in New York City. She used teams of black and white testers, standardized resumes, and she followed up their visits with telephone interviews with employers. These are the standard methods researchers use to test racial discrimination.
The results were exactly the same as in her earlier study. Black men with no criminal records were no more likely to find work than white men with criminal records. That's true despite the fact that New York has some of the nation's toughest laws against job discrimination
So what we see here is that even the toughest anti-discrimination laws don't do much to promote fairness for black men. The laws are not working as intended.
I would like to think that the market would eventually sort this all out. Firms who hire the most qualified people based only on ability would theoretically outperform competitors who discriminated based on race. The discriminatory competitors would be put out of business. Businesses would self-police because it is in their own self-interest to do so. Sadly, this doesn't seem to be working either, looking at the number of suits being won against discriminatory employers:
quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/business/12fedex.html?_r=1&adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1279929743-bAPpZzmlwUMt1PLx3f2hbA
FedEx Settles Racial Discrimination Suit
By REUTERS
Published: April 12, 2007
CHICAGO, April 11 (Reuters) — The package delivery company FedEx said on Wednesday that it had agreed to settle a racial discrimination lawsuit against its express unit, FedEx Express, for $53.5 million.
The suit, filed in 2003, charged that FedEx Express discriminated against its African-American and Hispanic workers by passing them over for promotion, paying them less than white workers and treating them unfairly in evaluation and disciplinary proceedings.
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/340087/how_racial_discrimination_cases_change.html?cat=17
How Racial Discrimination Cases Change the Fate of Prospective Employees
Despite the technological advancements and progress in social awareness that this country has made, we still have a long way to go in establishing equality among all races, classes, and genders. Discrimination and
prejudice stems from eons of cultural ideology in which one nationality or race deems themselves better than another. This is still alive in many facets of our daily lives, and sadly, one of those is in the realm of a necessity to a fruitful life: employment.
Landmark cases on racial discrimination in employment have catapulted our citizens into a state of heightened awareness. The traditional patriarchal view that in some ways recognize white men as the leaders in industry and economy (as well as intellect and ability) is thankfully dwindling due to some brave individuals who fought for the right to equal value and opportunities.
One such example of a landmark case on racial discrimination in employment is that of a group of former Walgreens employees versus their former employer. The US Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found that Walgreens employers had been assigning African Americans to lower performing stores in African American neighborhoods. Further violating Title VII of the Civil Rights Code, Walgreens denied promotions to non-white workers. The ensuing lawsuit against Walgreens resulted in a $20 million settlement.
These landmark cases on racial discrimination in employment can provide an insight into our social paradigms and help to swing the pendulum into a blind society where skin color and dimensions are not used as guidelines for employment or abilities.
In April of 2005, Judge Susan Illston of the US District Court for the Northern District of California deemed Abercrombie and Fitch guilty in racial discrimination against employees. The approved settlement stipulated that the retail chain pay out $40 million in damages to the claimants. As of now, Abercrombie and Fitch are under a consent decree to set benchmarks for hiring those of African American, Latino, or Asian decent as well as women.
The positive repercussions of this landmark case on racial discrimination in employment may indeed spur a more diverse employee base in one of North America's largest chain clothing stores. But this attention may also only serve to propagate the racial judgments that got them in this predicament in the first place.
Affirmative Action is a byproduct of these landmark cases on racial discrimination in employment. Some revel in the apparent equality that this measure summons, but others lament the requirement to hire on the basis of race and gender as they feel it presents a more invidious hiring approach and deepens resentment between racial groups.
Either way, it seems these landmark cases on racial discrimination in employment are deepening our awareness of workplace diversity as well as the legal implications of who hires whom.
So we see that the laws don't work as intended, nor is the market solving the problem. What now?
quote:
The argument could be made to let the courts handle it once allegations of racial discrimination have come to light. However, for many small and large businesses the practice of hiring only whites is common place. They are probably never going to get caught but perhaps knowing that such laws exist might make them pause and reevaluate their hiring practices.
You give someone a "fair" interview but they simply never are going to get the job no matter their qualifications.
So if laws don't fix it, and the market doesn't fix it, and even though lots of employers are getting sued for it, its still happening, what should we do? Is there anything that we can really do? Certainly progress has been made with racism in the past 50 years. Is is possible that the only thing we can do is wait? Will it take another 50 years before discrimination in hiring is a thing of the past?
quote:
Unlike racistjim this is an actual encounter that I will share with you. I run with a rough crowd. we don't pull punches and we call each other on our bullshit.
A good friend of mine owns a small financial advisory firm. He thinks that everything is hunky dory and that all affirmative action should be halted as it is no longer necessary and it only helps the unqualified gain employment. He is a Ronald Reagan loving conservative.
After making his statement another friend of ours mentioned that in all of the time that he has owned his firm that we have never noticed a dark complected face working for his firm. He asked what happens to the resumes of the Jamal Washingtons and the Latoya Parkers? My friend paused and then contritely said that they get thrown away.
We all said that he was an hypocritical asshole. He agreed.
It still doesn't change a damn thing.
Indeed.
|
RE: James Webb: Diversity and the Myth of White Privilege - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread