NO OUTSIDE SOURCES! PNLY USE ATTACHED MATERIAL!
Voltiwrites Chapter 13:
It also has to be recognized that efforts to improve the occupational prospects of women and minorities will sometimes be perceived as being in collision with the interests, rights, and perquisites of individuals who occupy favorable niches in the occupational structure. At the same time, modern societies have the greatadvantage of having escaped the zero-sum trap described in Chapter 3.Put less abstractly, this means that the gains of one group or individual will not necessarily produce matching losses for others. Rather, it is possible to play a positive-sum game, one in which a larger share of the population has the opportunity to develop and use its talents and skills and, in so doing, make greater contributions to the economy and society that end up benefiting everyone.
Reflect up the persistent trends of blatant and less obvious forms of discrimination against women and non-whites regarding work as you respond to the following questions:
Discuss at least two (2) different arenas or types of race and gender discrimination in relation to work.
What are some efforts that might improve the occupational prospects of these groups? How effective are these efforts in your view?
Do you believe that you have been either advantaged or disadvantaged in your occupational choices or work opportunities because of your race, ethnicity or gender? How so?
13 Diversity in the Workplace When cartoonists depicted a “worker” in decades past, their illustrations usually featured a brawny, white male. Today, as we have seen, the typical worker is engaged in the provision of some kind of service that requires little in the way of physical strength. No less important, the workforce is more diverse than it was in the past. At the end of the first decade of the 21st century, women composed 46.8 percent of the American workforce, while 11.4 percent of all workers were African American, 14.5 percent were Latino, and 4.7 percent were Asian American.1 To put it concisely, white males now constitute a minority of the American labor force. In this chapter, we will look at the various dimensions of workplace diversity, paying particular attention to the difficulties experienced by women and minorities while also noting efforts to create greater equality in the workplace and beyond. Race, Ethnicity, and Hiring Practices In Chapter 7, we saw how educational attainments, credentials, and social networks affect an individual’s employment prospects. Yet ascribed characteristics such as race and ethnicity still influence hiring decisions. In the past, the linkage between hiring practices and the race or ethnicity of job seekers often was painfully evident. In the 19th century, newspaper want ads sometimes contained the phrase “Irish need not apply,” and members of other ethnic groups were simply not considered for many positions. Well into the 20th century, African Americans were frequently excluded from jobs in the manufacturing sector, and when they were hired at all, the heaviest, dirtiest, and lowest-paying work was often reserved for them. Apprenticeships to prepare for skilled occupations were almost always limited to whites, and often just to whites of particular ethnic backgrounds. Overt discrimination of this sort has been illegal since the 1960s, but many hiring barriers still exist. One important problem for many minority group members lies in their lack of incorporation into job-related social networks. As we have seen, being connected to a social network considerably improves an individual’s chances of landing a job. Consequently, the existence of networks that include some individuals while excluding others perpetuates existing patterns of discrimination and inequality. The problem is particularly acute for residents of America’s inner cities, which are disproportionately populated by members of racial and ethnic minorities. Many of America’s cities have experienced a “hollowing out” of their economic base as a large number of manufacturing firms have closed or departed for other locales. The loss of these enterprises has been accompanied by the disappearance of low-skill jobs that had offered decent wages and benefits. A large number of these jobs, particularly the best-paying ones, were not held by inner- city residents, but jobs paying even middling wages supported the families of many minority workers. The loss of these jobs has produced a ripple effect throughout their communities. With job losses has come an erosion of collective purchasing power, which has diminished the revenues of local businesses, such as retail shops, and service providers, such as barbers and beauticians. https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781483342412/epub/OEBPS/ch13.html#fn1 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781483342412/epub/OEBPS/ch07.html Lost revenues mean lost jobs, generating a downward economic spiral that leaves large urban areas in desperate straits, exacerbating criminal activities, drug addiction, and the whole catalogue of inner-city ills.2 There are many reasons for the departure of inner-city industrial enterprises. Some simply have gone out of business, victims of economic, cultural, and technological change. Others have gone abroad to places where labor is cheaper and environmental regulations are minimal. At the same time, however, a significant number of business relocations have taken place because the old neighborhood came to be viewed as “undesirable.” The reasons for a place being so defined are many and varied, but it must be recognized that issues of race and ethnicity can figure prominently in this assessment.3 Many inner cities have higher crime rates than those of outlying suburbs, although the media’s propensity to focus on violent episodes can lead to exaggerated notions about their extent. But the risk of being victimized is a reality, and it often becomes a key component of a vicious circle resulting in diminished employment opportunities for inner-city residents; crime and the fear of it contribute to the flight of businesses, resulting in the loss of jobs and more poverty, which in turn fuels more criminal activity and more businesses departing for greener pastures. It is possible, of course, for inner-city residents to find jobs in other parts of the city and its suburbs. But even if prospective employers are willing to hire them (and, after all, some employers left in order to get away from racial and ethnic minorities), difficulties still remain in getting to job sites, especially when they are not well served by public transportation and job seekers cannot afford to own, maintain, and operate a car. And to return to an earlier theme, people living in inner cities are further disadvantaged by being unable to tap into the informal social networks that, as we have just seen, often are of vital importance for learning about job opportunities.4 Differential access to networks is, of course, not the only source of unequal job opportunities. Prejudicial attitudes also prevent members of racial and ethnic minorities from getting jobs for which they are well qualified, although opinions differ as to how pervasive these attitudes are today. Still, it is evident that jobs and occupations are not distributed randomly through the population as a whole. At the most fundamental level, statistics on employment and unemployment clearly indicate unequal outcomes in regard to finding and holding a job. In the first quarter of 2011, for example, the unemployment rate for white men was 10.5 percent, while white women fared somewhat better at 8.3 percent. The corresponding figures for African American men and women were 18.9 and 13.2 percent. The unemployment rates for Latino men and women were 12.9 and 11.9 percent, while Asian American men and women fared best with unemployment rates of 6.6 and 7.3 percent.5 The exact contribution of discrimination to unequal outcomes in regard to hiring and job- retention decisions is difficult to ascertain. A few research studies have attempted to determine the extent of discriminatory behavior on the part of employers by sending to prospective employers black and white persons who were equally matched in terms of their references, employment backgrounds, and ability to present themselves. These studies found that discrimination against black applicants was not overwhelming, but neither was it insignificant. In one research project sponsored by the Urban Institute, pairs of matched white and black individuals applied for jobs in Chicago and Washington, DC. No difference was found in 79.9 percent of the cases; both applicants were either offered the job or rejected. But in 14.8 percent of the cases, the white applicant was offered the position while the black applicant was rejected. In the remaining 5.3 percent of the cases, the black applicant received a job offer.6 In contradiction to these findings, however, were the results of a similar study conducted in Denver that found no difference in the https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781483342412/epub/OEBPS/ch13.html#fn2 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781483342412/epub/OEBPS/ch13.html#fn3 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781483342412/epub/OEBPS/ch13.html#fn4 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781483342412/epub/OEBPS/ch13.html#fn5 https://jigsaw.vitalsource.com/books/9781483342412/epub/OEBPS/ch13.html#fn6 job offers extended to white and black applicants. Both sets of studies have been criticized on methodological grounds. As might be expected, those convinced of the reality of racial discrimination criticized the methodology of the Denver study, while those taking the opposite position found flaws with the studies conducted in Chicago and Washington, DC. Although few employers exhibit blatantly discriminatory behavior today, unintentional discrimination may result from the way job requirements have been stipulated. In particular, the use of educational qualifications in order to determine the suitability of an applicant for a position may have unfortunate consequences for some minority group members. Many jobs require a significant amount of educational preparation before competence can be assumed, but as Chapter 7 indicated, much of what is learned in school is of limited relevance to the performance of many, if not most, jobs. Seen from this perspective, educational requirements often qualify and disqualify job applicants on grounds that are largely extraneous to the demands of a particular job. This situation is unfortunate for many reasons, but its contribution to hiring practices that work to the disadvantage of racial and ethnic minorities is particularly problematic. Although African Americans and Latinos have made substantial strides in educational attainment in recent years, they still lag behind whites. In 2008, 87.1 percent of whites 25 years and older had graduated from high school, and 29.8 percent possessed a college degree. For African Americans, the figures were 83.0 and 19.6 percent, respectively, and for Latinos, 62.3 and 13.3 percent, respectively. Asian Americans had the highest level of educational attainment: 88.7 percent had high school diplomas, and 52.6 were college graduates.7 It should be apparent who is harmed the most when employers use educational credentials primarily as filtering or screening devices. Credentialing aside, there remains the issue of how changing skill requirements have affected employers’ hiring practices. The concept of “skill” encompasses a wide variety of on-the-job capabilities, but of particular relevance here is the distinction between “hard” skills and “soft” skills. The former have to do with technical capabilities, such as being able to effectively wield a hammer or use a spreadsheet program. “Soft” skills entail such things as motivation, demonstrating the ability to maintain good interpersonal relationships, and following orders without rancor. Skills of this sort have taken on greater prominence in recent decades, as service occupations have become the dominant source of employment. Unlike traditional industries such as mining or manufacturing, the majority of employees in service industries interact with members of the public, where well-developed social skills are essential for occupational success. An emphasis on soft skills as an important criterion for hiring has been particularly problematic for many members of racial and ethnic minority groups. On one hand, marked differences in speech, dress, and demeanor may make a job applicant less attractive, especially when the job calls for intensive interactions with the general public or participating