What We Know and Don't: Eradicating Employment Discrimination 50 Years After the Civil Rights Act

Abstract

Although nearly 50 years have passed since the Civil Rights Act, employment discrimination persists. Thus, this focal article raises and addresses critical issues regarding a yet unanswered question: how can organizational researchers and practitioners contribute to the ultimate goal of eradicating employment discrimination? This article will push previous work a step forward by considering discrimination reduction tactics spanning the attraction, selection, inclusion, and retention phases of the employment cycle. Additionally, we expand our discussion of strategies to reduce discrimination beyond classically studied racial, ethnic, and gender differences. Our synthesis of this literature will inform organizational psychologists on how to address discrimination, but will also highlight the lack of evidence regarding important aspects of these strategies.The year 2014 marks the 50th anniversary of the Civil Rights Act. In the nearly 50 years since this legislation was codified, organizational scholars, and practitioners have been among those working to ensure that the tenets of Title VII-which prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin-are implemented effectively. Despite substantial efforts over 5 decades, employment discrimination persists. Indeed, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) resolved 42,545 charges in 2012 alone, excluding cases where no reasonable cause was found or

The Impact of Method, Motivation, and Empathy on Diversity Training Effectiveness

“…While we do not think enough work has been conducted to develop specific hypotheses for these potential crossover effects, we believe this is an important research question that our work is uniquely positioned to begin answering. Indeed, recent reviews (see Lindsey et al 2013;Ruggs et al 2013) have called for a better understanding of prejudice reduction strategies for stigmatized individuals that vary based on Goffman's (1963) theoretical dimension of visibility.…”

Prime and Prejudice

“…As documented in Table , management research on subconscious prejudice, compared to social psychology, is scant, aside from open‐ended mentions, for example, “something below the surface is clearly at work” (Chugh, , p. 207). Management research has focused mostly on examining links between conscious prejudice and work discrimination (Goldman et al, ; Lindsey et al, ). Findings include evidence that compared with White employees, Black employees received lower job evaluations, fewer promotions, and reported less career satisfaction (Greenhaus, Parasuaman, & Wormely, ); graduate students with White men mentors received higher annual compensation (Dreher & Cox, ); and gender and race were factors in vulnerability to uncivil treatment at work, which predicted employees’ intent to quit (Cortina et al, ).…”

“…Discrimination is defined as unequal treatment of individuals or groups because of their demographic characteristics (Allport, ; Pettigrew, ). Work discrimination, the outcome focus of this work, occurs when demographic attributes irrelevant to the job are used in lieu of qualifications as the criteria upon which to treat applicants, employees, and each other (Dipboye & Colella, ; Lindsey, King, McCausland, Jones, & Dunleavy, ). Extant management research has focused predominantly on conscious causes of work discrimination, leaving much unsaid theoretically about why organisational members still discriminate when they know they should not.…”

“…Whether one confers with official government reports (Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, ), court cases (e.g., Barrett vs. Whirlpool, , Jaffe vs. Morgan Stanley, ), litigation statistics (FY 1997–2015, www.EEOC.gov), or research (Dovidio & Gaertner, ; Goldman, Gutek, Stein, & Lewis, ; Lindsey et al, ), reports of work discrimination appear to be rising. Upward trends have likewise been reported for work aggression (Wood, Braeken, & Niven, ), deviance (Robinson, Wang, & Kiewitz, ), incivility (Cortina, Kabat‐Farr, Leskinen, Huerta, & Magley, ), disloyalty (Chung, Liao, Jackson, Subramony, Colakoglu, & Jiang, ), and micro‐aggressions (Sue et al, ).…”

Invisible Disabilities: Unique Strategies for Workplace Allies

“…Left out of this discussion are key players in improving the working lives of invisibly disabled individuals: allies. Nonstigmatized ally coworkers are especially influential in improving the climate of diversity within organizations (Lindsey, King, McCausland, Jones, & Dunleavy, ; Ruggs, Martinez, & Hebl, ; Sabat, Martinez, & Wessel, ). Nonstigmatized allies are more effective at changing attitudes through confrontation (Rasinski & Czopp, ) and can produce positive workplace outcomes for stigmatized employees by reacting favorably to disclosures of hidden stigmas (Griffith & Hebl, ; Law, Martinez, Ruggs, Hebl, & Akers, ).…”