Can competition in the hiring market undermine ethnic discrimination during the hiring process?

Author(s):  
Hairong Hu
2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (7) ◽  
pp. 394-406 ◽  
Author(s):  
Casey Boyd-Swan ◽  
Chris M. Herbst

This article examines racial and ethnic discrimination in the child care teacher hiring process. We construct a unique data set that combines a résumé audit study of center-based providers with a follow-up survey of those in the original audit sample. Fictitious résumés were randomly assigned White-, Black-, and Hispanic-sounding names and submitted in response to real teacher job advertisements. The survey was then administered to capture the characteristics of children, teachers, and administrators within the center. These data reveal three key results. First, we find robust evidence of discrimination: Black and Hispanic applicants receive significantly fewer interview requests than observationally equivalent Whites. Second, our results are consistent with a model of customer discrimination: The racial and ethnic composition of the center’s customer base is correlated with the characteristics of job seekers receiving an interview. Finally, we show that states’ child care regulations mitigate the racial and ethnic gap in interview requests.


2021 ◽  
pp. 019791832110420
Author(s):  
Miriam Schmaus ◽  
Cornelia Kristen

Based on a field experiment conducted in Germany between October 2014 and October 2015, this article focuses on the disadvantages associated with the presence of a foreign accent in the early hiring process, when applicants call in response to a job advertisement to ask whether the position is still available. We examine whether a foreign accent influences employers’ behaviors via productivity considerations and/or whether foreign-accented speech is related to statistical discrimination or tastes among employers or customers that translate into differential treatment. To address these processes, we supplement our field-experimental data with information on job and firm characteristics from the texts of vacancy announcements and advertising companies’ homepages, on labor supply from the Federal Employment Agency, and on anti-immigrant attitudes from the German General Social Survey. Results suggest that while calling with a Turkish name did not result in a lower rate of positive replies, this rate was reduced for candidates who called with a Turkish accent. Turkish-accented applicants were told more often than the advertised position was already filled. Our findings suggest that the difference in response rates was not due to productivity considerations related to how well individuals understood foreign-accented speakers. Instead, results support the notion that the observed disadvantages were linked to discrimination based on employers’ ethnic tastes. While we found no indications pointing to the relevance of customer tastes or statistical discrimination, we cannot rule out these processes altogether. Our findings demonstrate that language cues can be more relevant than applicants’ names in shaping employers’ initial responses. They, thereby, highlight the need to consider multiple ethnic cues and different stages of the hiring process.


Social Forces ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 99 (2) ◽  
pp. 732-759 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lincoln Quillian ◽  
John J Lee ◽  
Mariana Oliver

Abstract Field experiments using fictitious applications have become an increasingly important method for assessing hiring discrimination. Most field experiments of hiring, however, only observe whether the applicant receives an invitation to interview, called the “callback.” How adequate is our understanding of discrimination in the hiring process based on an assessment of discrimination in callbacks, when the ultimate subject of interest is discrimination in job offers? To address this question, we examine evidence from all available field experimental studies of racial or ethnic discrimination in hiring that go to the job offer outcome. Our sample includes 12 studies encompassing more than 13,000 job applications. We find considerable additional discrimination in hiring after the callback: majority applicants in our sample receive 53% more callbacks than comparable minority applicants, but majority applicants receive 145% more job offers than comparable minority applicants. The additional discrimination from interview to job offer is weakly correlated (r = 0.21) with the level of discrimination earlier in the hiring process. We discuss the implications of our results for theories of discrimination, including statistical discrimination.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document