Blacklist or Short List: Do Employers Discriminate against Union Supporter Job Applicants?

Starting in the 1980s, US employers revived aggressive action against unions. Employers’ public opposition to unions yielded a scholarly consensus that US employers actively and consistently discriminate against union supporters. However, evidence for widespread employer anti-union discrimination is based mainly on employer reactions to rare union organizing campaigns. To measure baseline or preventive anti-union discrimination, the authors field the first ever US-based résumé correspondence study of employer responses to union supporter applicants. Focus is on entry-level, non-college degree jobs and findings show no difference in employer callback rates for union supporter applicants relative to non-union applicants. Drawing on interviews and survey data, the authors suggest that union weakness itself may have hollowed preventive employer discrimination against union supporters.

Desistance, persistence, resilience and resistance: A qualitative exploration of how Black fathers with criminal records navigate employer discrimination

While research suggests a growing proclivity amongst contemporary fathers towards emotional involvement and child caregiving, studies indicate that most men still experience unrelenting pressure to provide financially for their family. For some fathers, the ability to spend time with their children is contingent on financial provision. Fathering, therefore, can be dependent on employment. The intersection of Blackness, maleness, and a criminal record, however, often results in employer discrimination, which hinders reentering Black men’s ability to secure legitimate revenue streams and achieve fathering expectations. In response to these barriers, many men agentically create opportunities for themselves in order to provide for their families. Framed using Sites of Resilience and Posttraumatic Growth, the current study draws from qualitative data and adds to the literature by focusing on the act of hurdling rather than the hurdles faced upon reentry. Findings demonstrate how hustling upon reentry is not a display of persistent criminal character but, rather, reflects a resilient response to systemic racism and blocked opportunities. The discussion on policy implications is led by participant suggestions on how to deter criminal activity while providing opportunities for men with criminal records to support their families.

Explaining Race and Gender Wage Gaps

This chapter uses data from the American Community Survey (ACS) and the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 cohort (NLSY79) to calculate wage differentials. Measured wage gaps shrink and are often eliminated when accounting for a variety of factors, suggesting that discrimination may not be the primary driver of earnings differentials. When examining NLSY79 data, differences in schooling, scores on the Armed Forces Qualification Test, and lifetime work experience explain virtually all the difference in hourly pay between minority and white men. For women, controlling for these variables results in a wage premium for minority women. This does not rule out the possibility that the variables controlled for do not themselves reflect past employer discrimination; however, these effects should not be confused with current employer discrimination. The data also suggest that the gender wage gap is driven by different choices made by men and women and not gender discrimination.

'Sex' and Religion after Bostock

This paper reviews the U.S. Supreme Court’s opinion in Bostock v. Clayton County (2020). There, the Court held that by barring employer discrimination against any individual “because of such individual’s . . . sex,” Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 also bars employment discrimination because an individual is gay or transgender. The paper then speculates about how much Bostock will affect how likely lower court judges will read other “sex” discrimination prohibitions in the U.S. Code in the same way, in part based on a canvass of the text of about 150 of those prohibitions. The paper also discusses the religion-based defenses that defendants may raise in response under Title VII itself, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, and the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Beauty, Job Tasks, and Wages: A New Conclusion about Employer Taste-Based Discrimination

Using novel data from the Berea Panel Study, we show that the beauty wage premium for college graduates exists only in jobs where attractiveness is plausibly a productive characteristic. A large premium exists in jobs with substantial amounts of interpersonal interaction but not in jobs that require working with information. This finding is inconsistent with employer taste-based discrimination, which would favor attractive workers in all jobs. Unique task data address concerns that measurement error in the importance of interpersonal tasks may bias empirical work toward finding employer discrimination. Our conclusions are in stark contrast to the findings of existing research.

The Gender Wage Gap Opens Long before Motherhood. Panel Evidence on Early Careers in Switzerland

According to a popular argument in economics, the gender wage gap persists not because of employer discrimination against women, but because of the differential investment of fathers and mothers into paid work and the household. We test this argument by comparing the evolution of wages between men and women before the onset of family formation and gendered household specialization. We use a cohort study of young adults for Switzerland (TREE 2000–2014) and match the two sexes on their intellectual ability and educational attainment before they enter the labour market. We then use the ensuing survey waves to account for human capital and job characteristics as well as for values towards work and family. We replicate our analysis with a second panel study of Swiss graduate students. We find in both cohort studies an unexplained gender wage gap of between 3 to 6 percent in favour of men. This result suggests that young women earn lower wages than young men with the same productive characteristics long before they have children. Translated into annual wages, this means that young women lose out on half a monthly wage each year in comparison to young men.