Source: Julie Anderson, Jessica Milli, Melanie Kruvelis, Institute for Women’s Policy Research, Fact Sheet, R476, March 22, 2017
From the abstract:
If the earnings of women and men who are employed full-time, year-round change at the rate they have between 1959 and 2015, the gender wage gap in the United States will not close until 2059. The wage gap is projected to close first in Florida, with women achieving pay parity with men in 2038. In four states—North Dakota, Utah, Louisiana, and Wyoming—the wage gap will close in the 22nd century. A girl born in the United States in 2017 has a life expectancy of 87 years. In 2082, when she turns age 65, a wage gap will still remain in 13 states.
The Gender Wage Gap by Occupation 2016; and by Race and Ethnicity
Source: Ariane Hegewisch, Emma Williams-Baron, Institute for Women’s Policy Research, IWPR #C456, April 4, 2017
The Gender Wage Gap 2016: Earnings Differences by Race and Ethnicity
Source: Ariane Hegewisch, Emma Williams-Baron, Institute for Women’s Policy Research, IWPR #C454, March 7, 2017
Equal Pay For Women Won’t Happen Until the 23rd Century, Study Says
Source: Rebecca Dancer, Teen Vogue, March 14, 2017
According to Institute for Women’s Policy Research data, it could take 232 years for all women to see equal pay, at current rates.
Source: Rebecca Kolins Givan, Jacobin, April 4, 2017
You have a right to know how much your coworkers are paid — and if you want to close the wage gap, you should. …
….For most American workers, however, the salaries of their fellow workers remain a mystery. But it’s a mystery that can be solved, and the best way to do so is through collective bargaining. Most collective bargaining agreements include transparent pay scales where an employee can locate his or her salary based on job title, credentials, skills, seniority, experience, or some combination thereof. Pay under most collective bargaining agreements is open and transparent. Unions can eliminate wage disparities within a single employer and dramatically limit wage inequality even across employers. Collective bargaining agreements remove the ability for managers to set pay based on their own criteria which may be arbitrary, or influenced by implicit or explicit bias…..
Source: Kalpana Jain, The Conversation, March 20, 2017
March 21 marks the anniversary of the third protest march from Selma led by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. that culminated on the steps of the Capitol in Montgomery, Alabama, demanding voting rights for African-Americans.
As doctoral candidate at University of California, Irvine, Mary Schmitt explains, Selma was “a moment in civil rights history that played a crucial role in the passage of the 1965 Voting Rights Act.”
The first march started on March 7, 1965, but ended in violence. The second march started on March 9. The third march started on March 21, with 3,200 people under the protection of federal troops. By the time the marchers reach the state Capitol in Montgomery on March 25, their numbers had swelled to 25,000.
Scholars writing for The Conversation have emphasized the relevance of King’s nonviolent – and successful – resistance movement today.
Here are some highlights from The Conversation’s coverage….
Martin Luther King’s Radical Legacy, From the Poor People’s Campaign to Black Lives Matter
Source: Osagyefo Uhuru Sekou, Dissent, January 15, 2017
Source: Celeste K. Carruthers, Marianne H. Wanamaker, Journal of Labor Economics, Ahead of Print, March 23, 2017
From the abstract:
Competing explanations for the long-standing gap between black and white earnings attribute different weight to wage discrimination and human capital differences. Using new data on local school quality, we find that human capital played a predominant role in determining 1940 wage and occupational status gaps in the South despite entrenched racial discrimination in civic life and the lack of federal employment protections. The resulting wage gap coincides with the higher end of the range of estimates from the post–Civil Rights era. We estimate that truly “separate but equal” schools would have reduced wage inequality by 29%–48%.
Source: Richard Delgado, Jean Stefancic, University of Alabama – School of Law, Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2876702, November 28, 2016
From the abstract:
Shows that aggressive policing is only one of a number of measures that society uses to control minority groups with whom it is displeased for some reason, and that failing to see how the authorities deploy the different measures separately, serially, or in coordinated fashion is a serious mistake. Sketches a new form of policing that is respectful of minority residents and values, and provides a framework for reducing excessive incarceration and mitigating some of the cruelties associated with it.
Source: Jeremy R. Levine, Social Forces, Vol. 95 no. 3, March 2017
From the abstract:
From town halls to public forums, disadvantaged neighborhoods appear more “participatory” than ever. Yet increased participation has not necessarily resulted in increased influence. This article, drawing on a four-year ethnographic study of redevelopment politics in Boston, presents an explanation for the decoupling of participation from the promise of democratic decision-making. I find that poor urban residents gain the appearance of power and status by invoking and policing membership in “the community”—a boundary sometimes, though not always, implicitly defined by race. But this appearance of power is largely an illusion. In public meetings, government officials can reinforce their authority and disempower residents by exploiting the fact that the boundary demarcating “the community” lacks a standardized definition. When officials laud “the community” as an abstract ideal rather than a specific group of people, they reduce “the community process” to a bureaucratic procedure. Residents appear empowered, while officials retain ultimate decision-making authority. I use the tools of cultural sociology to make sense of these findings and conclude with implications for the study of participatory governance and urban inequality.
Source: Heather Whitney, Harvard Law School; University of Chicago – Law School, Date Written: February 22, 2017
From the abstract:
While a number of concerns have been raised about the on-demand economy, evidence of discrimination has been especially noted and publically condemned. Airbnb, for instance, came under fire when a Harvard Business School study showed that property owners were less likely to accept those with black-sounding names as renters and non-black hosts were able to charge approximately 12% more than black hosts. Similarly, in an October 2016 working paper conducted by the National Bureau of Economic Research, researchers looking at taxi-services Uber and Lyft showed that the cancellation rate for those with black-sounding names was more than twice as high as for those with white-sounding names. At the same time, largely in other parts of the country, many condemn not discrimination but the antidiscrimination laws designed to curb it, especially laws aimed at shielding those within the LGBTQ community from discrimination. Debates about discriminatory immigration policies dominate national headlines. 70% of the country is aware of the Black Lives Matter movement. We are, in short, in the midst of an important conversation about discrimination, the likes of which we have not seen since the Civil Rights Movement. Legal theorists and philosophers have taken note, arguing for changes to our current antidiscrimination law regime. But while these theorists have disagreed about the proper scope of antidiscrimination law, they have widely agreed in one crucial respect: namely, that any expansion of antidiscrimination law beyond their preferred scope is problematic on autonomy grounds.
The centrality of “autonomy” in these debates should come as no surprise. Throughout our history of racial conflict, all sides have claimed the ideal of autonomy as an ally to their cause. This is possible because of the concept’s flexibility. “Autonomy” can support a range of positions, depending on the presuppositions it’s packaged with. But when scholars invoke “autonomy” in a way that simply deploys these underlying presuppositions, instead of making these presuppositions explicit, situating them against reasonable rivals, and defending them, they fail to have what scholars at this point in time most crucially need: perspective. These scholars seem to neither notice nor understand why those who take different positions on questions of autonomy, or on specific legal interventions, do so, because the real bases of disagreement – which resides within these presuppositions – remain hidden. As a result, their rejection of certain antidiscrimination law regimes and support of others do little to move the debate about the proper scope of antidiscrimination law forward. Antidiscrimination law scholars are trapped in an ongoing cycle of autonomy assertions and as a result, the important debate about the proper scope of antidiscrimination law remains stalled. We cannot afford this.
My aim in this Essay is one of illumination and aid. I attempt to show why the mere assertion that a certain antidiscrimination law “violates autonomy” hides from view the true basis of disagreement and, in so doing, both fails to engage the relevant arguments while also failing to provide readers any reason to adopt the author’s preferred antidiscrimination law regime. I will do this by illuminating the presuppositions underpinning the two main conceptions of autonomy that are invoked in the antidiscrimination law literature. I then situate these presuppositions alongside rival possibilities. My hope is that this project will aid the development of more fruitful antidiscrimination law scholarship moving forward.
Source: Jesse Rhodes, The Conversation, February 1, 2017
….Put bluntly, there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud by impersonation in the United States. “Impersonation” is what we call the deliberate misrepresentation of identity by individuals in order to manipulate election outcomes.
Research suggests allegations of voter fraud and the calls for stringent election rules are motivated by the desire to suppress voting by citizens of color.
Because stringent election rules suppress minority voting, Trump’s call for an attack on nonexistent voter fraud should be met with serious concern by all Americans. The last thing the United States needs is more measures that make it harder to vote. ….
Source: Rupa Banerjee, Jeffrey G. Reitz, Phil Oreopoulos, University of Toronto, January 25, 2017
Analysis of amended data from a large e-scale Canadian employment audit study (Oreopoulos 2011) shows that large employers with over 500 employees discriminate against applicants with Asian (Chinese, Indian or Pakistani) names in the decision to call for an interview, about half as often as smaller employers. The audit involved submission of nearly 13,000 computer-generated resumes to a sample of 3,225 jobs offered online in Toronto and Montreal in 2008 and 2009 for which university-trained applicants were requested by email submission. An organization-size difference in employer response to Asian names on the resume exists when the Asian-named applicant has all Canadian qualifications (20% disadvantage for large employers, almost 40% disadvantage for small employers) and when they have some or all foreign qualifications (35% disadvantage for large employers, over 60% disadvantage for small employers). Discrimination in smaller organizations is most pronounced in considering applicants for jobs at the highest skill levels. As well, whereas the Asian-name disadvantage is overcome in large organizations when the applicant has an additional Canadian master’s degree, this is not the case in smaller organizations. It is suggested that large organizations discriminate less frequently because they have more resources devoted to recruitment, a more professionalized human resources recruitment process, and greater experience with a diverse staff complement. Experimentation with anonymized resume review may be an inexpensive way that organizations can test their own hiring procedures for discrimination.
Asian Last Names Lead To Fewer Job Interviews, Still
Source: Jenny J. Chen, NPR, February 23, 2017
Why Do Skilled Immigrants Struggle in the Labor Market? A Field Experiment with Thirteen Thousand Resumes
Source: Philip Oreopoulos, American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, vol. 3, no. 4, November 2011
Source: Angela Glover Blackwell, Stanford Social Innovation Review, Volume 15 Number 1, Winter 2017
Laws and programs designed to benefit vulnerable groups, such as the disabled or people of color, often end up benefiting all of society