Are Emily and Greg more Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? Racial Names

[markses]

A fascinating study suggests that resumes with "black sounding" names operate at a disadvantage. Here's a link to an abstract:

http://www.nber.org/digest/sep03/w9873.html

The 50 percent gap in callback rates is statistically very significant, Bertrand and Mullainathan note in Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination (NBER Working Paper No. 9873). It indicates that a white name yields as many more callbacks as an additional eight years of experience. Race, the authors add, also affects the reward to having a better resume. Whites with higher quality resumes received 30 percent more callbacks than whites with lower quality resumes. But the positive impact of a better resume for those with Africa-American names was much smaller.

"While one may have expected that improved credentials may alleviate employers' fear that African-American applicants are deficient in some unobservable skills, this is not the case in our data," the authors write. "Discrimination therefore appears to bite twice, making it harder not only for African-Americans to find a job but also to improve their employability."

From a policy standpoint, this aspect of the findings suggests that training programs alone may not be enough to alleviate the barriers raised by discrimination, the authors write. "If African-Americans recognize how employers reward their skills, they may be rationally more reluctant than whites to even participate in these programs."

The experiment, conducted between July 2001 and January 2002, reveals several other aspects of discrimination. If the fictitious resume indicates that the applicant lives in a wealthier, or more educated, or more-white neighborhood, the callback rate rises. Interestingly, this effect does not differ by race. Indeed, if ghettos and bad neighborhoods are particularly stigmatizing for African-Americans, one might have expected them to be helped more than whites by having a "good" address.

Further, discrimination levels are statistically uniform across all the occupation and industry categories covered in the experiment. Federal contractors, sometimes regarded as more severely constrained by affirmative action laws, do not discriminate less. Neither do larger employers, or employers who explicitly state that they are "Equal Opportunity Employer" in their ads.

Another finding is that employers located in more African-American neighborhoods in Chicago are slightly less likely to discriminate. There is also little evidence that social background of applicants – suggested by the names used on resumes – drives the extent of discrimination.

---snip---

Now, we should probably concede that few of the human resources and other hiring folks are "racists" of the Bull Conners type (anymore than are folks on DU). And yet....

Here's a link to the whole study:

http://papers.nber.org/papers/w9873

[DrWeird]

1. Well, then maybe they should have normal names.

Like Newt, Strom, and Jeb.

[Rowdyboy]

2. Having worked 25 years in job placement, I say

YES, 100%.

Even among the blacks I worked with, Timothy's were calledd back more often than Timarious; Linda were called when LaQuinta was not.

Most hiring directors have typical "Anglo" names and are more at home with job applicants they can more easily relate to. At least, thats the only excuse I've ever been able to come up with.

on edit: before anyone misunderstands, I'm not saying I agree with this thinking. Its horrendous. Who gives a damn what your name is if you have the qualifications? However, in reality (sad as it is to say) it matters.

[markses]

3. So, in other words, still systemic racism

Perhaps even more insidious than before?

[Rowdyboy]

4. Absolutely

No question. But it naturally follows in a society where the VAST majority of people in hiring positions are of one ethnicity and social class. But yes, it is definitely the face of contemporary systemic racism.

[markses]

5. I'd dispute that it "naturally" follows

That's the rub. I don't think it's "natural" at all, but rather historical, contingent, and changeable. Of course, simply because something isn't natural doesn't make it any less forceful and entrenched. But we have to guard against the "That's just the way it is" gesture with all our critical and argumentative capacity. Even with the full strength of our imaginations.

[noiretextatique]

6. it's not natural...it is the very unnatural, but logical

extention of ____________________. whatever i name it would be inflammatory, so perhaps someone else can take a stab.

[Rowdyboy]

27. I phrased that poorly

It follows logically if you accept that cultural chauvinism is inherent. I think that makes a bit more sense and is closer to my real meaning.

[Clark Can WIN]

11. Rowdyboy

for some reason I read your posts in Clarks voice.

Are you overclarked? Or am I?

[Rowdyboy]

26. Perhaps both of us

:) You definitely heard regret, sadness and a measure of defeat in my voice. I can say with no hesitation after a quarter century that hiring practices (at least in my experience) are haphazard at best, and semi-openly racist at worst. I've seen, as a result, many good, educated, desperate people suffer due to ignorance and a lack of tolerance on the part of hirers. And that makes me very, very angry.

Also, I'm close to his age, and a southern male. So maybe I am a bit "overclarked". Thanks for pointing it out. I take it as a compliment :thumbsup:

[Kahuna]

43. Some of those names are hard to remember, spell and

pronounce. I'm black and I have a hard time with those made up names. To be honest with you, I don't even try to remember them. Some of them are so ridiculous sounding. Blame it on my advancing age.

[RobinA]

40. I Never Worked in Placement

but I was involved in hiring peers in a former job I had. The reasons given by higher ups for not calling people back upon receipt of a resume were beyond ridiculous. The most incredible assumptions were drawn from people's previous jobs, age, what they chose to do with their time... Talk about prejudice. And everyone involved was white, so race didn't even enter into it. This person worked too long at one place, that person didn't work long enough, another person had a great job at the time, so why were they looking to change. One woman was bounced because she was bored at her job (a job that was obviously boring) and looking for more challenge...how dare she...she was deemed an obvious malcontent before they even met her, and despite having the exact qualifications and experience they were looking for.

[Julien Sorel]

7. This is well-known stuff.

It's also well-known that if you take a a black man and a white man, dressed identically, and have them both try to flag down a cab, the white man does better. If you take a black person and a white person, give them identical resumes and coaching, and send them out on job interviews, the white person gets hired more often. I know lots of these experiments that have been done, most of them in the past couple of years. There isn't a whole lot you can do about it, of course, except work against it patiently and quietly, since the alternative these days is to be seen as an 'upitty n-----' looking for a handout, but stuff like that is out there.

[FlaGranny]

41. I don't have any doubts about this happening,

but, in my field it did not. The field I work in is SSSOOO in need of qualified people that we interviewed everyone with the required training and experience and always hired the most qualified regardless of anything else, including race and names. I do realize that is not the norm though.

[Clark Can WIN]

8. Ugly truth is still the truth

I believe that is true now.

I also believe we should be working to make it just another bad memory.

[jiacinto]

9. I wonder what affects neighborhoods had with it

nt

[markses]

36. Why do you wonder - It says so right in the post!

The experiment, conducted between July 2001 and January 2002, reveals several other aspects of discrimination. If the fictitious resume indicates that the applicant lives in a wealthier, or more educated, or more-white neighborhood, the callback rate rises. Interestingly, this effect does not differ by race. Indeed, if ghettos and bad neighborhoods are particularly stigmatizing for African-Americans, one might have expected them to be helped more than whites by having a "good" address.
etc...
---snip---

[jiacinto]

47. Ok

I wonder if I will get any further with my new address then.

[jiacinto]

10. Well I lived in NMB, FL

I wonder if that played a role in my difficulty finding work or not. I don't know what NMB's reputation in S. Florida is.

[noiretextatique]

14. addresses are probably a problem as well

i never put addresses on my resume...not that it would make that much of a difference. i live in an integrated area, and i don't have a "black-sounding" name.

[jiacinto]

46. Ok

nt

[_Jumper_]

12. There were large gaps between black names

Ebony did slightly better than the average white name; Aisha's success rate was 1/6 that of the average white name. Lakisha was either 1/4 or 1/5. Apparently, all if it is not racial. There are significant gaps due to racial discrimination but I find it very hard to believe the gap is 50%.

Why do people give their kids ethnic names when they know it will create problems?

[noiretextatique]

13. why is a name a "problem?"

seems a more appropriate question. i doubt many parents even considered this when naming their children...though they probably will now.

[_Jumper_]

17. They are symptoms of the race/ethnicity problem

They are a problem because names are identified with a distinct group. The root cause of all racism and ethnic hatred is the existence of different, and for the most part, segregated groups. Any group prefers its own group members over others. It is not just whites. If we truly seek to eliminate this we must deconstruct racial and ethnic groups and denounce ANY form of personal racial preferences.

[noiretextatique]

19. that is INSANE, to put it mildly

so...which ethinicity should we all assimilate to...let me guess :eyes: shall we all call ourselves john or ann WHITE, so as not to further racism?

[_Jumper_]

28. Refute it then

:D

[noiretextatique]

20. that is INSANE, to put it mildly

so...which ethinicity should we all assimilate to...let me guess :eyes: shall we all call ourselves john or ann WHITE, so as not to further racism?

[_Jumper_]

21. I am not surprised

Do you believe it is okay to have a racial preference? If memory serves me correctly you staunchly do...

[noiretextatique]

23. are you SERIOUS...you think "names" = racism?!!?

that's...i don't even know WHAT to call that...except :crazy: and you didn't answer my question: WHICH CULTURE SHALL WE ALL ASSIMILATE TO?
should we all be called JESUS or JAMAL or CHI-KIN or TRAN...or just plain old JOHN WHITE? :wtf: ward connerly would be proud of you :eyes: how about this: NAMES SHOULDN'T MATTER!!!!!!!!!!!
wasn't it MLK who said something about "the content of one's character?"

[_Jumper_]

25. Response

Group names are a product of "group pride. "Group pride is a euphemism for racism or ethnic bigotry.

Why do you think people give their kids ethnic names?:)

I could not care less what culture we should assimilate to. I have no use for ethnic and racial groups so I would have no qualms with joining a new one(especially since, being a minority, they have caused nothing but trouble for me).

"wasn't it MLK who said something about "the content of one's character?"

Is it not true that you have stated--vehemently--that it is okay to prefer a particular racial group? You can't have it both ways...

[noiretextatique]

29. culture, language, and tradition

both cultural, and familial...that's a part of what names are about...not necessarily 'racial pride.' names may also be about creativity and uniqueness and individuality.

your problem: the way you characterize, miminize, and bastadize this issue (and others like it), inevitably leads you to the easy, albeit incorrect, conclusion.

the answer is not to conform to the dominant culture's pathology, but rather, to work to heal the pathology. towards that end, you may address me, from this moment forward, as Ms. Black Africa.

thank you...and goodnight.

[_Jumper_]

49. Your name response is valid

I disagree but your argument is pluasible. Of course, cultural pride is a code word for racial or ethnic pride IMO.

Anyway, let us deal with the main issue: can a color-blind society be achieved without complete integration?

"the answer is not to conform to the dominant culture's pathology, but rather, to work to heal the pathology."

That will never happen. Name one place in the world where tribalism has resulted in a society where race and/or ethnicity are not significant causes of prejudice and hate.

By the way, the problem is not endemic to the "dominant culture." There are plenty of minority racists, and some minority racists on DU...

[markses]

39. Absurd

You act as if the "white" names WEREN'T "group" names. As is usual in white racism, white remains the unmarked non-race. Lakisha, in your view, is a "group name" while John is not? Is that your fucking point? If it is, then you just slid right into the whole history of racism in the United States, where "white" gets to be the un-raced center, while everyone else is a "group" of some kind.

Emily and Greg are just as much group names as Lakisha and Jamal. They are the names, however, of the group with the POWER, and so get to pretend that they are not "group names." To flip the script, why don't white folk start naming their kids Laquana - y'know, just so they won't be segregating themselves out as a group? Puh-fucking-leez.

[_Jumper_]

48. Read post #17

White names are obviously also group names. They are a symptom of the race/ethnicity problem. However, there is virtually no discrimination based on someone having a white name. Therefore, there is a difference between naming your kid John or Muhammad.

[markses]

53. Sheer Cowardice masquerading as pragmatism

Group A and Group B both have distinctive, deeply rooted cultures which they value.

Group A has the power to destroy the individuals in Group B, and freely wields that power, especially along the axis of cultural difference. Yet, Group A insists on maintaining its own distinctive traits.

The solution for Group B, according to _Jumper_? Become MORE like group A, abandon the differences that you value. Perhaps, that way, Group A will oppress you less intensely, or less often.

This is either rank fascism or bootlicking cowardice, though it dresses itself up as pragmatism. Or, rather, it is pragmatic, in the way that laying back and "enjoying" a rape is "pragmatic."

So-called "tribalism" isn't bad because of difference. Tribalism is bad only when some tribes HATE DIFFERENCE, and assert their full power to stamp it out. Or when some people assert such hatred is natural and regular in an attempt to rationalize the depravity of their own group violence.

[_Jumper_]

60. Why do they value them?

"Group A and Group B both have distinctive, deeply rooted cultures which they value.

Group A has the power to destroy the individuals in Group B, and freely wields that power, especially along the axis of cultural difference. Yet, Group A insists on maintaining its own distinctive traits.

The solution for Group B, according to _Jumper_? Become MORE like group A, abandon the differences that you value. Perhaps, that way, Group A will oppress you less intensely, or less often."

If they did not value their precious "cultures" and groups we would not have the problems engendered by race and ethnicity.

Did you even read what I posted? I want to dismantle ALL ethnic and racial groups.

The melting pot thoery does not result in groups assimilating 100% into another culture. What it results in is the creation of a new culture that is a synthesis of the several cultures that blended together to create it.

"So-called "tribalism" isn't bad because of difference. Tribalism is bad only when some tribes HATE DIFFERENCE, and assert their full power to stamp it out. Or when some people assert such hatred is natural and regular in an attempt to rationalize the depravity of their own group violence."

Groups ALWAYS develop prejudices against other groups. Name one society where various groups lived together without discrimination and hostility towards other groups. That is the result of the precious concept of "race" and "ethnicity."

Anyone can restort to name-calling. Do not tell us what you are against; tell us what you are for. What is your alternative???? Please state ONE instance where your paradigm has succeeded.

[BevHarris]

15. I was with you until your last statement.

As for your first observations, I'm betting that people with names like Tran and Kim-cho and Fukiko and Jesus also get fewer call backs.

As for not naming your kids ethnic names, I'd rather that we hit this problem head-on and keep exposing these prejudices. We are should not be melting into only one ingredient in this country. Me, I like hot sauce on my curry which I make Japanese-style.

We can do better, but I'm reading a lot at DU that makes me uncomfortable -- are we "not ready" for gay marriage (like it hasn't been happening unofficially for thousands of years, folks). Name our kids non-ethnic sounding names? Nah.

Bev

[Tatiana]

16. Thank you. N/T

[noiretextatique]

18. some black parents will see this as a "warning"

it is a kind of alarm, i suppose. *sigh*

[_Jumper_]

24. Different groups will always develop prejudices against other groups...

...and many members of that group will discriminate based upon their prejudices. Why? Because they will tend to segregate based on what "group" they are part of. As long as different groups exist there will be discrimination since many will prefer "their own people." Even on DU MANY posters think it is moral to prefer "your own group."

American history has proven that the melting pot works. Ask any American of Irish or Italian descent. Name one place where tribalism has worked.

[noiretextatique]

31. the melting pot hasn't worked so great for EVERY group

and as far as i know, not all italian and irish people anglocized their names. and even some "colored" people passed for white...some still do. i wonder why :eyes:

[_Jumper_]

50. Why the name obsession?

I made the melting pot statement while talking about the problems caused by the existence of different groups. Italian, Irish, German, et al. people melted away and now face virtually none, if not no discrimination from the "dominant culture."

It has worked for every group that participated in it.

"even some "colored" people passed for white...some still do. i wonder why "

Maybe, just maybe, they do not want to be discriminated against. :wow:

So, do you still approve of people having a "racial preference"?

[markses]

54. So it is incumbent on the people being victimized

to make themselves invisible? But not incumbent on the victimizing dominant culture to transform itself from being racist? Good strategy....:eyes: Blaming the victim, writ large.

As far as I know, people still have German names and Italian names and Irish names - even though they are supposedly "integrated." The fact is that the dominant culture CHANGED by integrated those groups - it stopped being racist there (which was a bit easier, if the race line was parsed along color - it's a lot easier to make the Irish, Greeks, Lithuanian and Italians "white" - an artificial and recent historical category in any case - than it is to make black folks white, as it were). But, not surprisingly, you misrepresent even the history of that, as if it were the Irish who changed their names, rather than the dominant Anglo culture that became more accepting of the Irish names and culture. Which of course begs the question: Why won't the dominant culture do the same for Shakeela and Jamar?

Oh, in that case it's Shakeela and Jamar who should change! Of course. Patrick Sullivan gets to stay Patrick Sullivan, but Shakeela Brown should become Chrissy Brown in order to avoid dread "tribalism." Gimme a fucking break. It's RACISM.

Your posts are not only despicable and ignorant, they are not even coherent given your supposed "argument," though I use the term advisedly.

[prolesunited]

56. I have nothing to add to your well-phrased statement except

:yourock:

[_Jumper_]

59. There are two issues

1) Names

This is a minor issue that is a symptom of a larger problem. You are putting too much emphasis on it.

2) Tribalism

"So it is incumbent on the people being victimized"
Posted by markses
to make themselves invisible? But not incumbent on the victimizing dominant culture to transform itself from being racist? Good strategy...."

No. Re-read what I have said.

"As far as I know, people still have German names and Italian names and Irish names - even though they are supposedly "integrated." The fact is that the dominant culture CHANGED by integrated those groups - it stopped being racist there "

Why did they integrate those groups? Did they wake up one morning and decide discrimination was wrong or did they wake up one morning and realize "they" were now "us" and "we" were now "them"?

"But, not surprisingly, you misrepresent even the history of that, as if it were the Irish who changed their names"

Where did I say that? :wow: The only thing I have said about names per se is that giving kids ethnic names is a bad choice because it will increase discrimination against them.

"Which of course begs the question: Why won't the dominant culture do the same for Shakeela and Jamar?"

Why did the aforementioned groups get integrated? They did it through cultural assimilation and intermarriage that blurred ethnic lines. Shakeela and Jamar's grandchildren will be integrated.


"Oh, in that case it's Shakeela and Jamar who should change!"

Mario and Gerhard did, how did that work out? The reality is that both sides need to change, despite the wishes of the people with "ethnic" and "racial" pride who want every other group to change for their almighty, master group.


"Your posts are not only despicable and ignorant"

That is a compelling refutation!!!!! :eyes:

"they are not even coherent given your supposed "argument," "

Well, if you say so! :beer:

[Lady President]

35. Ebony is easy to pronounce

First, I want to mention that judging people by their name is ridiculous. I have a double first name and I'm constantly being asked what I like to be called.

One of the reasons why Ebony would be hired over Aisha is because the person in the HR department can pronounce Ebony. They don't feel nervous to make a mistake during the initial phone call or interview. Clearly, there are HR people who use black sounding names to weed out applicants, but there are also some who are afraid they will erroneously appear racist if they mispronounce Lakisha.

I also read a study that said that employers prefer traditional spellings. People seem to think that Alison, Mary, or Christopher are more level-headed and responsible than Allyson, Merry, or Kristofer. :shrug:

[Brewman_Jax]

37. Here's one for thought

The writer (from Iran) is wrestling with the same issue.

http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=17007

The point of this is that one's name should NOT cause any problems or serve as an excuse for racism.

[Some Moran]

22. Not in our business...:)

The youngest person we've ever hired is named Rasheeda...And we seldomn hire people under 18.

[Rowdyboy]

30. This problem will be extinct within the next generation...

Society is changing. When only a minority of children had unusual or ethnic names, it was an enormous drawback. Today, however, the are white baby "Jamals" and "LaKeashas", Hispanic and Black "Tyler" and "Brittanies", and Asians nicknamed "Bruce" and "Annette".

Yes, this has been a problem in the past. Yes, it remains a problem to an extent today.

No, it will not be a problem twenty years from now.

Society evolves.

[economic justice]

32. I hope you're right. nt

[noiretextatique]

33. you are right...something the article mentions

not everyone with "black-sounding" names is black, nor do some names stererotyped as "black-sounding" belong to actual black people. it will fade away...this nonsense.

[kskiska]

34. I have Chinese friends who own a restaurant

and everyone who works there has abandoned their Chinese name and adopted names such as Benny, Diana, Lynn, Louis, and George. Some of them barely even speak English. They don't do this for resume purposes, though, since they can get restaurant work anywhere. They just want to have American names.

[spinbaby]

38. Many Chinese names are difficult for Americans

Perhaps they prefer an American name because they're tired of hearing Americans mangle their Chinese names.

[NewJeffCT]

44. that's part of it

My wife's real name is Jun, and I have yet to hear anybody that is not Chinese pronounce it properly. Most people pronounce it like the month June, which is not correct.

Chinese often take 'American' names because they feel they will fit in better and it will help them find a job... my wife is anxious to get her green card & citizenship so she can change her last name to be equal to mine, even though I'd prefer she kept her name. Her logic is that having an 'American' last name will look better on her resume, even though my last name is a hard to pronounce Polish one, as opposed to her hard to pronounce Chinese last name.

[Kahuna]

42. I know this is true. My son has a baby boy due next month...

We love the name, "Jamal," but have ruled it out because we feel he may be discriminated against because of his name. Hopefully that will change in 20 years when my grandson is of age. But, we're not taking any chances.

[SoCalDem]

45. Make that his middle name..

Then HE can decide what people can call him :)

Congrats, Gramps:)

[wndycty]

51. Well if Clark is elected. . .

. . .we may very well have our first press secretary named Jamal. Jamal Simmons is one of Clark's top press secretaries.

[GregW]

52. I think Greg is an excellent name!

:eyes:

[hippiechick]

55. ... and that is why I named my 'brown' baby daughter

Gwyneth Alexandra when she was born in 1991.

Strong yet feminine and 'racially neutral' but still unique, IMO.
She can sit on the SCOTUS, or be a rap star, or both if she so chooses.



:hippie:

[tigereye]

57. when I was a manager, granted at a non-profit

I was always glad to interview and hire a diverse group of people. Our staff was made up of men and women of all races. I never paid any attention to addresses ( except wondering what part of town it was and if I had been there) and always made qualifications and experience the prime factors. There were many rules about how you should interact with potential employees, interview them and what you were allowed to ask. I find it hard to understand how others could so knowingly flaunt these rules and thereby limit the strength of their workforce and workplace. I also met some really neat people due to our agency's desire for diversity!

[Cleita]

58. Back in the sixties, these things would make it hard for you

to gain desirable employment; being an African American or any nationality that was too dark; being fat if you were a woman; talking with a foreign accent if it wasn't acceptably European. Also, often Jewish surnames would also make a person be passed up on a job. Of course no woman could really aspire to a management position unless she was so ambitious and focused that she turned into a Leona Helmsley clone. Older women who hadn't hung on to their jobs since their youth hardly ever got employed into entry level positions and were often forced to become housekeepers or cooks if they needed employment.

I mean I was pretty naive about this at first, but then it started to dawn on me that everyone in the workplace was overwhelmingly white with a small number of Asians. The women were attractive and young. A few cranky old bookkeepers were locked in backroom offices where no one saw them. Of course the janitorial staff were black.