1Economic Inequality & Affirmative ActionEmployment Discrimination by NameSourceAre Emily and Greg More Employable thanLakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market DiscriminationMarianne Bertrand & Sendhil MullainathanWorking Paper 9873http://www.nber.org/papers/w9873NATIONAL BUREAU OF ECONOMIC RESEARCHMethod (1) • Controlled experiment• Chicago and Boston July 2001 – January 2002• Generated a bank of realistic but fictitious resumes of college graduates • Resumes were of high and low quality, as assessed by experience, career profile, employment gaps, skills listed• Names randomly assigned to resumes were either “White” (e.g. Emily, Kristen, Carrie) or “Black” (e.g. Latoya, Ebony, Tamika). Many names used.Method (2)• Responded to 1300 newspaper ads for jobs in four occupational categories: sales, administrative support, clerical services and customer services.• For each advertised job, sent four resumes by fax or mail: White high quality, White low quality, Black high quality, Black low quality. Nearly 5000 resumes sent.• Dependent variable is whether the employer called or emailed and left a messageResult 1: % of applicants called by race and subjective “quality” measure024681012Black Low Black High White Low White High2Result 2: % of applicants called by race and expected response predicted by other variables0246810121416Black Low Black High White Low White HighPrediction equation from 1/3 of sample used for the other 2/3Result 3: Racial mix of calls to applicants by 1300 employers0102030405060708090No Calls White=Black White>Black Black>WhiteResult 3: Racial mix of calls to applicants by 232 employers who called at least one4.818.873.76012345678910White=Black White>Black Black>White% of employersDevah Pager: The Price of a Criminal RecordControlled experiment, entry-level job seekers responding to newspaper ads in Milwaukee job marketFigure 1. The Effect of a Criminal Record on Employment Opportunities for Whites16330510152025303540Criminal Record No RecordPercent Called BackFigure 2. The Effect of a Criminal Record for Black and White Job Applicants31612330510152025303540Black WhitePercent Called BackCriminalRecordNoRecord3Some economic trendsMedian Household Income by Race 1998-2000 (three year average)43800287005260031700318000100002000030000400005000060000White NH Black Asian Hispanic AmerIndMedian Household Income by Race 2000-2002 (three year average)0100002000030000400005000060000White NH Black Asian Hispanic AmerIndMedian Household Income over time, by racePoverty by race over timePovertySource: U.S. Census, Poverty in the United States: 2001, P60-219, Table 1. Poverty by Race& Family Type0510152025303540Married Couple Female Head% in PovertyWhite Black Hispanic Asian/ PI4Indiv Income by race, educ, sex 1999Income Full-Time Workers 199910000200003000040000500006000070000lt 9 9-12 HS grad somecollegeAA BA MABlack Male Hisp Male White NH Male Black Female Hisp Female White NH FemaleWhite menBlack menHispanic menWhite womenHispanic womenblack womenSource: US Census Bureau data for 1999, CPSIncome, Race, Sex over TimeMedian Income as Percent of White Males, 1970-199640%50%60%70%80%90%100%110%1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1998WhiteMenBlackMenHispanicMenWhiteWomenBlackWomenHispanicWomenAccounting for income difference• Grodsky & Pager ASR 2001. Statistical analysis looking at income difference between White & Black men, asking how much is due to personal characteristics (I.e. education & work experience), how much to occupational differences; also public vs private• Findings: (1) less racial difference in public vs private sector (2) private sector racial difference is not only higher but gets larger (not smaller) when occupational characteristics are controlled AND is higher for high-wage than low-wage occupations• (Show graphs from article)WealthIs More Unequal Than IncomeMedian Family Net Worth$0$10,000$20,000$30,000$40,000$50,000$60,000$70,000$80,000$90,0001983 1989 1992 1995 1998White African-American HispanicHome Ownership0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%1983 1989 1992 1995 1998White African-American Hispanic5Financial WealthMedian Family Financial Wealth$0$5,000$10,000$15,000$20,000$25,000$30,000$35,000$40,0001983 1989 1992 1995 1998White African-American HispanicBoth Race and Income Affect Net WorthMedian Net Worth 1994Source: Dalton Conley, Being Black, Living in the Red$0$50,000$100,000$150,000$200,000$250,000$300,000$350,000<$15,001 $15,001-$35,000 $35001-$50,000 $50,001-$75,000 >$75,000 AllYearly Family IncomeWhite BlackMedian Home Equity by Race, IncomeMedian Home Equity 1994Source: Dalton Conley, Being Black, Living in the Red$0$10,000$20,000$30,000$40,000$50,000$60,000$70,000$80,000$90,000$100,000<$15,001 $15,001-$35,000 $35001-$50,000 $50,001-$75,000 >$75,000 AllYearly Family IncomeWhite BlackFinancial Wealth by Race, IncomeMedian Financial Wealth (Net Worth Minus Home Equity) 1994Source: Dalton Conley, Being Black, Living in the Red$0$20,000$40,000$60,000$80,000$100,000$120,000$140,000$160,000$180,000$200,000<$15,001 $15,001-$35,000 $35001-$50,000 $50,001-$75,000 >$75,000 AllYearly Family IncomeWhite Black“In The Red” (Debts Greater than Assets)Percent In the Red (Owe More than Their Assets) 1994Source: Dalton Conley, Being Black, Living in the Red0%10%20%30%40%50%60%<$15,001 $15,001-$35,000 $35001-$50,000 $50,001-$75,000 >$75,000 AllYearly Family IncomeWhite BlackAddressing InequalityAffirmative Action6Meanings of “Affirmative Action”• Aggressive Equality: seek underrepresented groups as applicants, document that you are not discriminating against them, statistical patterns part of the documentation• Preference at the Margin: among equally-qualified applicants, prefer the underrepresented• Different Standards: Quotas, set-asides, different qualificationsAffirmative Action in the 1960s• Was promoted to address the problems of overt discrimination• Discrimination in employment by race (and gender) was LEGAL until 1966!• Long-term defense of employment discrimination by overt racists & by employers who did not want any interference in their practices• “Can’t legislate equality” the motto of resistance• Where did the opponents of equality go after 1966?Myths about Affirmative Action• It caused racial hostility• It caused perceptions of Black (or other minority) inferiority• It turned a situation of racial equality into a situation of “reverse discrimination”• Employers
View Full Document
Unlocking...