Discrimination, Complexity, and the Public/Private Sector Question

Abstract

Does employment discrimination vary in degree or character across public and private labor market sectors? Prior research cannot fully address this question because it typically relies on one dimension of discriminationestimates of wage gaps. This study extends the literature by analyzing 11,528 legally verified cases of race and sex discrimination from the Ohio Civil Rights Commission (1986)(1987)(1988)(1989)(1990)(1991)(1992)(1993)(1994)(1995)(1996)(1997)(1998)(1999)(2000)(2001)(2002)(2003). Quantitative analyses demonstrate that aggregate rates of verified discrimination vary little by sector, yet there are elevated rates of public sector promotion discrimination and elevated rates of private sector firing discrimination. In-depth qualitative analyses show that specific sectoral processes contribute to these aggregate patterns. In the public sector, limited accountability for promotion decisions allows managers to devalue seniority, augment "soft skills," and sabotage multiple stages of formalized proceedings. Moreover, the very devices intended to curb discriminatory promotion may inadvertently multiply the stages for bias to enter decisions. In the private sector, managers exploit the latitude afforded by the employment-at-will doctrine to differentially terminate workers, sometimes justifying their actions as cost saving in a competitive market. The author argues that these processes are in line with statistical discrimination and social closure theories and concludes by discussing their implications for understandings of workplace inequality.

Corporate Diversity Programs and Gender Inequality in the Oil and Gas Industry

“…As a consequence, diversity programs are more easily subverted than Affirmative Action programs. As Byron (2010) argues, managers routinely “ignore, sabotage, or differentially enforce formal policies, usually to the detriment of women and Blacks. This ubiquitous practice … allows managers to discriminate while maintaining an anti-discriminatory façade” (p. 462; see also Light, Roscigno, & Kalev, 2011; Roscigno, Williams, & Byron, 2012).…”

American Indian Poverty in the Contemporary United States

“…Racial minorities nationwide continue to face discrimination in hiring (Pager et al. ), firing (Byron ; Zwerling and Silver ), and promotion and demotion (Wilson et al. ; Wilson and McBrier ).…”

Relational Power, Legitimation, and Pregnancy Discrimination

“…Moreover, costs associated with paid leaves, job shifts, and health insurance coverage may be seen as incongruent with the primary objectives of economic efficiency and profit within organizations (Edwards 1996;Glass and Fodor 2011). Some employers even explicitly refer to pregnant women as economic "liabilities" (Byron 2010). And the pregnant body itself-a body that is often portrayed as ailing, hormonal, and uncontrollable-is sometimes thought to disrupt organizational space by affecting coworker and patron comfort levels (Gatrell 2011).…”

“…This has been linked to the changing "social contract" over the last several decades, wherein workplace protections have declined and employment has become increasingly precarious (Kalleberg 2009). Indeed, nearly half of all contemporary private sector discrimination charges are now based on the single issue of firing (Byron 2010;hirsh 2008).…”