RSS

Tag Archives: jobs

Leaving Jim Crow – The Great Migration and The Chicago Defender

Great article! It talks about the role of the black press in initiating and sustaining the black migration from the south between 1915 and 1930 – and how the South’s Jim Crow Laws and Lynching fueled that migration.

‘Bound for the Promised Land’

African Americans devised a mass exodus from the Jim Crow South,largely at the urging of The Chicago Defender

In the spring of 1916, incumbent President Woodrow Wilson began a difficult presidential campaign. Wilson was facing a reunified Republican Party and an electorate skeptical of his pledge to keep the United States out of World War I—he was also facing obstacles from the African American electorate, which though small could be decisive in several key states. During his first run for office in 1912, leaders from the African American community had supported Wilson even though he was the son of a Confederate chaplain who, as a historian, had helped manufacture revisionist histories of the post–Civil War years. But black voters now felt betrayed by Wilson’s conduct as president: He segregated the federal government for the first time ever, and he screened the racist film Birth of a Nation in the White House.

Jacob Lawrence

The Chicago Defender, the nation’s leading African American newspaper at the time, was all too happy to heap on the criticism, declaring Wilson a “colossal failure” and challenging his foreign policy—both over the invasion of Haiti the previous year and for sending troops into Mexico to pursue revolutionary leader Pancho Villa. “If President Woodrow Wilson is so anxious to teach the world good morals,” read one editorial on the subject, “let him begin by placing the U.S. Army in the South; institute a chase of the lynchers as earnestly as the one he is now carrying on in Mexico.”

By most measures, the total number of lynchings was, in fact, down from prior years; it was the severity of the incidents that had increased. In May, The Defender printed a letter from a white resident of Waco, Texas, a witness to the horrific murder of a 17-year-old named Jesse Washington. The letter writer was outraged by what he had seen: A mob of “fifteen to twenty-thousand men and women intermingled with children and babies in their arms” gathered to torture Washington and then burn him at the stake. Accused of the murder of a white woman several miles from his home, Washington was convicted by a jury despite scant evidence. Then, as happened all too often, Washington was dragged from the courtroom, hung from a tree, and burned on a funeral pyre. “The crowd was made up of some of the supposed best citizens of the South,” the letter writer noted. “Doctors, lawyers, business men and Christians (posing as such, however). After the fire subsided, the mob was not satisfied: They hacked with pen knives the fingers, the toes, and pieces of flesh from the body, carrying them as souvenirs to their automobiles.” The correspondent went on to conclude that it was absurd to send soldiers to Mexico “when the troops are needed right here in the South.”

This from a collection of letters from the University of Chicago about the Great Migration

See the UC Collection Here

For several years, The Defender had demanded federal intervention as the only meaningful solution to the brutality of Southern whites. But that summer, as hundreds of African Americans arrived at Chicago’s train stations every week,The Defender’s position on the migration northward evolved. In August, under the headline “Southerners Plan to Stop Exodus,” the newspaper reported that recruiters for one of the Pennsylvania-based railroad lines had convinced all of the workers on one steamship line in Jacksonville, Florida, to quit and move to the North en masse, leaving the steamship owners suddenly without a crew. The Jacksonville City Council responded by passing a law requiring labor agents from Northern companies to pay $1,000 for a license.

Incidents like this convinced The Defender’s publisher, Robert Abbott, that migration was at once an effective tactic for hurting the white South and a real opportunity for African Americans to live in freedom. Abbott had experienced discrimination from labor unions himself when he first arrived in Chicago from Georgia less than 20 years earlier, and he had been reluctant to invite his fellows to the city if there were no real job opportunities.  He became positively enthusiastic about migration, however, when he saw the mounting evidence that the departure of African Americans was negatively affecting the Southern economy.

In November, as Woodrow Wilson won a narrow reelection victory, The Defender’s editorial page published “Bound for the Promised Land,” by M. Ward, a then-unknown poet whose portrait photo shows a nattily dressed young man with a satin bow tie. The poem reflects the experiences of those who had already migrated north, found jobs, and sent for their wives, as well as of the Southerners’ efforts to ban the work of Northern labor agents:

From Florida’s stormy banks I’ll go, I’ll bid the South goodbye; No longer will they treat me so, And knock me in the eye,

Hasten on my dark brother, Duck the Jim Crow law.

No Crackers North to slap your mother, or knock you on the jaw.

No Cracker there to seduce your sister, nor to hang you to a limb.

And you’re not obliged to call ’em “Mister,” nor skin ’em back at him.

The poem was so popular that the issue sold out, prompting The Defender to reprint it a few months later. “This poem caused more men to leave the Southland than any other effort,” the newspaper proudly noted….Read the Rest Here

Albert A. Smith “The Reason” Featured in The CRISIS in March 1920

 
2 Comments

Posted by on January 12, 2016 in Black History

 

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Conservative Anti-Intellectualism Based In Job Gentrification

The low IQ and low knowledge level of Republican Conservatives going back to the Bushit is legend in this country. The anti-intellectualism of the right provided the fire to elect George W. Bush, and fueled the rise of noted idiots like Sarah Palin AKA The Sno Ho’. While many pundits would like to tie the rise of that to the deleterious effects of right wing media like Fox News, the politicization of stupid by a series of folks starting with Bush Jr along with the plethora of conservative wonks, or a political base of the “great unwashed”, AKA “white trash” fundamentalist christians, and Joe the plumber blue collar types…

I think the answer is something quite different, and a lot more pedestrian.

For years the US Government, the top tiers of he education establishment, and even corporate America have pushed the concept that a better educated (and by this we mean college educated) populace is required to operated the mechanics of first, the industrial, and then a post industrial and now, internet based world. As the country migrated from industrial to a service economy, a great many people were displaced. The former factory workers became the unemployed, as the Government, and then industry continually raised the entry qualification barrier to new jobs higher and higher. This reached the level of ridiculousness, wherein  companies, and some parts of the government required a college degree for someone whose job was to empty the wastebaskets, put paper in the copier, or work in the mail room. Discounting entirely the value that Joe, the proverbial plumber, had worked for 20 years, showed up every day, and done his work.

Downgrading the very core values of responsibility, hard, work, and reliability which built this country in the first place. While eliminating jobs.

Politicians tend to talk at this group of folks, very few take the time to really understand their issues and talk to them. It is far easier to demagogue.

This reached a peak when the Bushit and his minions tried to privatize the Government – shifting what had been half a million to a million Civil Service jobs into the private sector of “Beltway Bandits”. The old Civil Service System was broken into Grades from 2 – 16, with the lower levels supplying the workers doing maintenance, clerical, and blue collar facilities. To take a job above a certain level required a college degree, and to reach the highest managerial and professional levels required advanced degrees. These grade 2-12 jobs became the brick and mortar of the black middle class not only in Washington DC, but in every city where there are Federal Offices post WWII. Someone with a high-school education could enter the system, and could possibly advance to a managerial level position making very good money though their career.

What privatization did was to eliminate those low level entry jobs, and convert them to requiring a college degree. The result of which was to eliminate in large part minorities…as well as the working class whites. Let’s call its what it is…Job Gentrification.

When I started in the computer/telecommunications industry there were no colleges or universities offering degrees in computer science. The heavy hitters at the time consisted of folks with degrees in Mathematics or Electrical Engineering. Of course there probably were no more than 2,000 of us worldwide in the telecom side. In the late 80’s I taught a class at one of the local universities having to do with advanced computer systems architecture – which in those days was mostly the big mainframes and supercomputers with an honorable mention to the PC type systems. The first day I walk in, surveyed the class – and to my surprise I knew half of the students and had worked with them on the very same giant computer systems I was talking about. These were the guys who wrote the software, managed the systems, and even in several cases had been key players in inventing some of the technologies! They all had reached the top of the grade at which they could no longer progress in the Government without a degree.

Had a discussion with a Headhunter (recruiter) a few years ago, who informed me I wasn’t qualified for a job due to the lack of a industry (company) certification… When I pointed out to her, I was one of the guys who helped invent the technology in question in the first place, and held patents in the area – and that the guy who “invented the Internet”…

Had no industry certification.

Things were/are much, much worse for the unemployed factory worker – who didn’t have access (money) to education, and was locked out of they types of well paying jobs, doable by someone by taking a few classes at worst.

THAT, to my believe is the real base of the resentment against “intellectualism”. Do they have a right to be angry? Yes. Do they have the right to delve into racism, blaming minorities for their plight? No. They are being used as useful fools…Again.

Donald Trump talks at a fourth-grade level. Maybe that’s why the Fox News audience loves him

The culture of anti-intellectualism in America is fueling hateful, racist demagogues — in politics and on TV

It’s a cliché to say that democratic states can’t function properly without an informed electorate. But it’s absolutely true. And this is why, heading into the 2016 election year, I’m nervous about the future. With Donald Trump leading the Republican presidential contenders, even many Republican die-hards are shaking in their boots.

But Trump isn’t the cause, just the symptom. The deeper cause is a strain of anti-intellectualism that runs through the roots of American culture. And while this strain is found on both sides of the political spectrum (see some liberals on vaccines and chemtrails), it’s mostly concentrated among religious conservatives on the political right. For those who espouse anti-intellectualism, conspiracy theories have the same clout as legitimate science, the opinions of non-experts are just as credible as those of the experts, and ideology takes precedence over the cold hard facts.

The US has fostered a culture of anti-intellectualism more than “most other Western countries.” While traveling through Europe and the UK for extended periods of time, I’ve often been quite envious of how respectful other countries are toward those with knowledge in the fields of science and the humanities. In the UK, for example, it’s generally not seen as “uncool” to have a higher degree from a good university. Often, it confers the degree-holder a certain social respect and admiration. Many of the top comedians in the UK have attended institutions like Oxford and Cambridge, including Michael Palin, Eric Idol, John Cleese, David Mitchell, Richard Ayoade and Stephen Fry. And shows such as “QI,” which combines academic discussions with uproarious, irreverent humor, are popular hits.

Not only is the U.S. unique for its love affair with anti-intellectualism, but this romantic relationship appears to have grown stronger over the past few decades. A primary reason for this is no doubt the huge influence that conservative media have had on American culture, such as Fox News, which is currently the most trusted news network in the country. The problem is that “Fox News” is a misnomer. The network is, to quote Jon Stewart, more of a “relentlessly activist” organization for conservative causes than an intellectually honest conveyor of information. Indeed, there are to date at least seven academic studies that have found that Fox News’ viewership constitutes the most misinformed audience out there.

From climate change to healthcare, the Iraq War to the country of Obama’s birth (no, it’s not Kenya), denizens of Fox News are more confident about falsehoods than viewers of any other news network. Several studies even found a positive correlation between how often one watches Fox News and the degree to which one’s worldview is misinformed.

What’s most dangerous about Fox News, though, isn’t its cynical use of Orwellian doublespeak, as in “Fair and Balanced” and “No Spin Zone,” to conceal a conservative agenda. Nor is it the network’s repeated failure to accurately report the facts. Rather, the most dangerous consequence of Fox News is that it discourages that most important form of rigorous curiosity called critical thinking. If people want a single phenomenon to blame for the gradual decline of the American empire, direct your wagging finger at the devaluation of critical thinking skills.

It’s not an accident that Fox News wants an audience that isnt preoccupied with carefully dissecting complex social, political, economic and religious issues. Critical thinking is perhaps our very best strategy for apprehending the true nature of reality, and as the great comedian Stephen Colbert once declared, “reality has a well-known liberal bias.” In other words, critical thinking could lead to liberalism — or worse, to that most dreaded form of liberal fanaticism called secular progressivism.

Scientific studies actually back up this line of reasoning. Consider a 2012 studypublished in Science, one of the most prestigious journals in the world. This study found that when people are prompted to use their critical faculties, they become less likely to affirm religious statements. In other words, there’s a causal link between “analytical thinking” and religious disbelief. Perhaps this is why the Republican Party of Texas literally wrote into its 2012 platform that, “We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs [that] have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs.” God forbid children start questioning their “fixed beliefs” about religion — or politics…Read the rest Here

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

The “Meritocracy” Lie

The most successful meritocracy in America is the US Military – despite some setbacks due to politicization  during the Bush Administration under Donald Rumsfeld. Coming in second is the US Government. Dead last is commercial industry.

You can pretty much figure out whether an organization will be monochrome or open based on the management’s performance objectives. Those companies who hire minorities tend to have objectives built in to the senior management’s performance. Those which do not either don’t care, or don’t want any changes to their monochrome workforce.

The False Promise of Meritocracy

Managers who believe themselves to be fair and objective judges of ability often overlook women and minorities who are deserving of job offers and pay increases.

Americans are, compared with populations of other countries, particularly enthusiastic about the idea of meritocracy, a system that rewards merit (ability + effort) with success. Americans are more likely to believe that people are rewarded for their intelligence and skills and are less likely to believe that family wealth plays a key role in getting ahead. And Americans’ support for meritocratic principles has remained stable over the last two decades despite growing economic inequality, recessions, and the fact that there is less mobility in the United States than in most other industrialized countries.

This strong commitment to meritocratic ideals can lead to suspicion of efforts that aim to support particular demographic groups. For example, initiativesdesigned to recruit or provide development opportunities to under-represented groups often come under attack as “reverse discrimination.” Some companies even justify not having diversity policies by highlighting their commitment to meritocracy. If a company evaluates people on their skills, abilities, and merit, without consideration of their gender, race, sexuality etc., and managers are objective in their assessments then there is no need for diversity policies, the thinking goes.

But is this true? Do commitments to meritocracy and objectivity lead to more fair workplaces?

Emilio J. Castilla, a professor at MIT’s Sloan School of Management, has explored how meritocratic ideals and HR practices like pay-for-performance play out in organizations, and he’s come to some unexpected conclusions.

In one company study, Castilla examined almost 9,000 employees who worked as support-staff at a large service-sector company. The company was committed to diversity and had implemented a merit-driven compensation system intended to reward high-level performance and to reward all employees equitably.

But Castilla’s analysis revealed some very non-meritocratic outcomes. Women, ethnic minorities, and non-U.S.-born employees received a smaller increase in compensation compared with white men, despite holding the same jobs, working in the same units, having the same supervisors, the same human capital, and importantly, receiving the same performance score. Despite stating that “performance is the primary bases for all salary increases,” the reality was that women, minorities, and those born outside the U.S. needed “to work harder and obtain higher performance scores in order to receive similar salary increases to white men.”

These findings led Castilla to wonder if organizational cultures and practices designed to promote meritocracy actually accomplished the opposite. Could it be that the pursuit of meritocracy somehow triggered bias? Along with his colleague, the Indiana University sociology professor Stephen Bernard, they designed a series of lab experiments to find out. Each experiment had the same outcome. When a company’s core values emphasized meritocratic values, those in managerial positions awarded a larger monetary reward to the male employee than to an equally performing female employee. Castilla and Bernard termed their counter intuitive result “the paradox of meritocracy.”

The paradox of meritocracy builds on other research showing that those who think they are the most objective can actually exhibit the most bias in their evaluations. When people think they are objective and unbiased then they don’t monitor and scrutinize their own behavior. They just assume that they are right and that their assessments are accurate. Yet, studies repeatedly show that stereotypes of all kinds (gender, ethnicity, age, disability etc.) are filters through which we evaluate others, often in ways that advantage dominant groups and disadvantage lower-status groups. For example, studies repeatedly find that the resumes of whites and men are evaluated more positively than are the identical resumes of minorities and women.

This dynamic is precisely why meritocracy can exacerbate inequality—because being committed to meritocratic principles makes people think that they actually are making correct evaluations and behaving fairly. Organizations that emphasize meritocratic ideals serve to reinforce an employee’s belief that they are impartial, which creates the exact conditions under which implicit and explicit biases are unleashed.

“The pursuit of meritocracy is more difficult than it appears,” Castilla said at a recent conference hosted by the Clayman Institute for Gender Research at Stanford, “but that doesn’t mean the pursuit is futile. My research provides a cautionary lesson that practices implemented to increase fairness and equity need to be carefully thought through so that potential opportunities for bias are addressed.” While companies may want to hire and promote the best and brightest, it’s easier said than done.

GapJumpers, a Silicon Valley start-up, is focused on making meritocracy a reality by taking a skills-first approach to identifying the highest-performing talent.  Modeled after research showing that blind auditions block biased evaluations, GapJumpers developed an online technology platform that enables hiring managers to hold blind audition challenges. In the challenges, job applicants are given mini assignments that are designed to assess the applicant for the specific skills required for the open position. All submissions are evaluated and ranked, and the top-performing submissions (minus any applicant identifiers) are then reviewed by the hiring manager who selects candidates to bring in to interview. The result: About 60 percent of the top talent identified through GapJumpers’ blind audition process come from underrepresented backgrounds.

Hiring managers do not expect this outcome. “The high percentage of underrepresented applicants that make it through the skills-first screening process is often met with suspicion,” says Sharon Jank, a social psychologist and Ph.D. candidate at Stanford University, who is conducting her doctoral research with GapJumpers.  In her work, Jank has observed that “hiring managers tend to be surprised that the top performing submissions they pick to advance very often come from applicants without an elite education, training, or experience.  This suggests blind performance auditions are a powerful tool to manage bias and address the pervasive and incorrect assumption that elite pedigree best predicts performance of on the job skills.”

“Our biases lead to sub-optimal talent selection decisions when evaluating resumes,” says GapJumpers cofounder Kédar Iyer. “By scaling the successful and proven method of blind performance auditions, GapJumpers’ results show that real work performance trumps labels on a resume.”

In addition to blind auditions, transparency and accountability also support more meritocratic outcomes. Recently, Castilla published the results from a longitudinal study he conducted with the same large service-sector company that he had studied years earlier. After learning from Castilla’s analysis that there were pay disparities in their organization (white men received more compensation than equally performing women, minorities, and non-U.S.-born individuals) the company asked Castilla to recommend practices to close the pay gap….More Here

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on December 3, 2015 in The New Jim Crow

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

2.3 Million Apply for 368 Entry Level Jobs

Under the heading – “You know it’s bad when…”. This one from India.

Indian job ad receives 2.3m applicants

A Indian job advertisement for humble office tea boys and night guards​ has attracted 2.32m applicants, including highly qualified graduates, in a sign of how desperate the swelling millions of young Indians are for job security.

Officials said it would take up to four years to conduct interviews for the 368 junior posts advertised by the Uttar Pradesh state government even if candidates were processed at the rate of 2,000 a day by multiple interview boards.

The unprecedented deluge of applications is the latest confirmation of the grim employment prospects in the poor and densely populated states of north India despite an official national unemployment rate of less than 5 per cent.

Narendra Modi, prime minister, promised to create jobs when he was elected last year at the head of the Bharatiya Janata party. His government has focused on programmes to develop workers’ skills, while party leaders have begged young Indians to become entrepreneurs.

But India is struggling to create employment even for the 12m school leavers entering the workforce each year, let alone for the accumulated backlog of unemployed among the population of 1.3bn.

Economists and investors put much of the blame on India’s highly restrictive labour laws, which discourage private employers from hiring, along with the privileges enjoyed by government employees and the “reservation” system of preferences for lower caste Indians. Fewer than a tenth of India’s 500m workers are employed in the formal sector, and half of those have jobs in government or state-owned companies such as Indian Railways.

Asked about the millions of applications for jobs as night-guards or office “peons” — the helpers who clean up and bring tea to bureaucrats — Surjit Bhalla, chairman of Oxus Investments, said: “Everything you know is wrong with India is personified in that statistic . . . both our labour laws and the fact that in a government job you do nothing and get paid a nice, healthy, fat wage. You can’t be fired. You’re there forever.”

The Uttar Pradesh government said it wanted the peons for the state assembly in Lucknow to be able to ride a bicycle and have at least five years of school education, but among the applicants were 255 with doctorates in subjects such as engineering as well as 200,000 with master’s degrees. Salaries start at about Rs16,000 ($240) per month.

“There are no jobs anywhere,” Alok Chaurasia, who has a degree in electronics and communication engineering, told NDTV television news. “The moment I saw the ad for the peon’s job, I applied. Any work is better than nothing.”

 

 

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on September 18, 2015 in News, You Know It's Bad When...

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Elizabeth Warren – “Them That’s Got”, and Them That’s Been Had

One of the massive Catch 22’s post economic meltdown in the 00’s has been the FICA Score System. With the housing meltdown, millions of people went into either foreclosure or credit crisis. As jobs shrunk and people lost jobs, they were unable to pay their bills. Trying to get a job? In a go-round reminiscent of Ray Charles’ Song line “If you have to have something, before you can get something, How you get the first is still a mystery to me!” NOPE! Our HR Department has determined your credit is bad.

So if you got laid off, and can’t pay your bills, you can’t get a new job to pay your bills on time…Because you were laid off and can’t pay your bills.

Elizabeth Warren just launched her latest populist fight — and it impacts millions of American workers

Progressive populist Sen. Elizabeth Warren says checking prospective employees’ credit history is “discrimination” and is calling on American employers to end the practice, which she argues “bears no relationship to job performance and that can be riddled with inaccuracies.”

In a new Time op-ed, the Massachusetts senator, along with Tennessee Rep. Steve Cohen (D) warned that the common practice of employers checking the credit history of potential employees was wrongheadedly discriminatory against “hard working people,” noting that “one in five job-seekers could be rejected by an employer because their credit report lists a medical debt in default—even when they’ve paid off the debt in full and on time”:

Credit reporting companies that sell Americans’ personal data to potential employers have pushed the narrative that a credit history somehow provides insight into someone’s character. But, as even a representative from the TransUnion credit bureau admitted, they “don’t have any research to show any statistical correlation between what’s in somebody’s credit report and their job performance.” In fact, research has shown that an individual’s credit has little to no correlation with his or her ability to succeed in the workplace. Credit reports are not a way to screen out bad potential employees; they are just a way to discriminate against people who have fallen on hard times.

Not only are credit reports poor indicators of job performance, but in many cases they aren’t even accurate. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) reported in 2013 that as many as 1 in 5 consumers could identify at least one error in their credit reports. That’s compounded by the difficulty in correcting errors—not only are consumers often unaware an error exists in the first place, but credit reporting agencies can be frustratingly slow to respond when it comes to fixing those mistakes.

A credit history, Warren suggested, was no proper indicator for a potential employees capabilities, and using it to help weed out candidates amounted to legalized “discrimination”:

For hardworking people struggling to make ends meet, the only way to get back on their feet is to find a good job and earn a paycheck. But even when they are able to sell their homes—often at a loss—or after they are forced to close their business’ doors or find temporary work, that bad credit history continues to haunt them.

And despite the often-desperate effort to find a job, many employers are unfairly shutting the door on applicants with less-than-stellar credit. We should call this what it is: discrimination.

As the Huffington Post noted, both Warren and Cohen have reintroduced the Equal Employment for All Act, which would ban employers from checking the credit reports of potential employees with a few exceptions. The legislation, the two lawmakers wrote, “makes sure that hiring decisions are based on an individual’s skill and experience—not on past financial struggles.”

“This is an issue of basic fairness,” Warren argued. “Americans should be able to compete for jobs on their merits, not on whether they have enough money to pay all their bills.”

“Much of America—hard-working, bill-paying America—has damaged credit,” the fierce Wall Street watchdog observed. “It is wrong to shut them out of the job market.”

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on September 15, 2015 in Democrat Primary, The Post-Racial Life

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

Congressional Black Caucus – Silicon Valley

This one from the guys who brought you the doctored Shirley Sherrod video, and the white pimp, James O’Keefe doctored videos on Acorn. So what I mean is, these guys aren’t exactly legitimate news people…Or legitimate much else for that matter.

In this article the Congressional Black Caucus is “threatening” Silicon Valley.

CONGRESSIONAL BLACK CAUCUS THREATENS SILICON VALLEY ON ‘DIVERSITY’

On Monday, the Congressional Black Caucus sent members to Silicon Valley to bully high-tech companies into hiring more blacks as part of their Tech 2020 Initiative.

According to KQED, North Carolina Rep. G.K. Butterfield, chair of the caucus, intoned, “Their Equal Opportunity Employment reports are embarrassing. It should be embarrassing to all of them. They have acknowledged they have shortcomings and want to partner with us to improve the results.  But all of them have a long way to go with diversity.”

Butterfield joined Rep. Barbara Lee (D-CA) and New York Rep. Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY) at various companies, including Apple, Google, Intel and SAP; on Tuesday they visited Pandora. On their tour, they spoke with Apple’s CEO Tim Cook and Intel’s CEO Brian Krzanich.

Apple acknowledged in 2014 that its employee base was 55% white, 15% Asian, 11% Latino and 7% percent black, prompting Cook to moan, “As CEO, I’m not satisfied with the numbers on this page.” KQED reported that 2% of Google Employees are black.

Jeffries threatened, “Many of these companies have issues before the Congress of the United States, and the relationship needs to be one of partnerships. We’re open to hearing the issues that they need to get resolved in order to put their businesses in the best possible position to be successful, but we want to make sure that everyone in this country has the opportunity to robustly pursue the American Dream.” Butterfield argued that the high-tech companies also function as federal contractors, adding, “And as such they have a responsibility first of all to be accountable to the federal government and also to be diverse in their workforce. We’re going to continue to challenge these companies until they get parity.”

Lee had already claimed the companies were federal contractors in May, stating, “Many of these companies are federal contractors, first of all, and they have an obligation to be inclusive. We want to see [diversity] plans from each company, and see how they’re going to invest.”

Google, Apple and Intel issued the necessary statements to appease the caucus; Yolanda Mangolini, Google’s director of diversity and inclusion, asserted, “We look forward to continuing conversations we’ve had in Washington with the Congressional Black Caucus and we welcome their visit. We share their commitment to enhancing the diversity of our organization and the tech industry more broadly.”

An Apple spokeswoman wrote, “We believe diversity is critical to making the best products in the world. It’s the reason we’re focused on changing the pipeline for the future workforce with programs like ConnectEd and also working to find the most diverse talent with programs like National Center for Women & Information technology and Thurgood Marshall College Fund. We look forward to continuing our work with the Congressional Black Caucus towards our shared goal of equal access to opportunities in technology.”

Now, to me at least – if you want those Tech Companies to hire black folks – you need know only three things. First, looking at the graduate degrees in Computer Sciences, black folks now graduate with about 12% of all Phd’s in the field… The problem?

Top universities turn out black and Hispanic computer science and computer engineering graduates at twice the rate that leading technology companies hire them, a USA TODAY analysis shows.

Technology companies blame the pool of job applicants for the severe shortage of blacks and Hispanics in Silicon Valley.

But these findings show that claim “does not hold water,” said Darrick Hamilton, professor of economics and urban policy at The New School in New York.

Meaning Apple’s line about the lack of talent and needing to “change the pipeline” is complete and utter bullshit. Why exactly didn’t these exalted Representatives “of the people” call them on it? Of course, with school segregation firmly in place in California under the guise of Prop 209, the vast majority of those black grads are coming from eastern schools, which don’t practice segregation.

Lastly – where are those jobs going? Try the H1b Program, where jobs which cannot be filled by the supposedly nonexistent Minority Graduates…

Are filled by Ivan from Russia, Wan from China, or Vishnu from India…At roughly 1/3 the salary.

So if the Congressional Black Caucus actually had anyone smart enough to diagnose the problem – or the cajones to do something about it… The solution is real easy.

Kill H1b. And watch the Republicans whine.

Come on down and get your black Yellowback Donkey Award!

Demo Yellow Donkey

Yellowback Donkey Award presented to the most cowardly and useless Democrats

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Black Unemployment Drops to Lowest Level Since 2007

The economy is recovering. Just not as quickly or as evenly as most would like.  This one from the WSJ…With the usual temporizing.

Black Unemployment Falls Below 10%, Still Twice the Rate for Whites

…For the first time since 2007, the national unemployment rate for African Americans dipped below 10 percent in the second quarter of 2015,  according to the Labor Department. Despite that improvement, at 9.5 percent, it’s still nearly twice the national average of 5.3%, and more than double the 4.6% rate for whites…

Overall, only 11 states had African American unemployment rates below 10%, according to an analysis by Valerie Wilson, director of the Economic Policy Institute’s Program on Race, Ethnicity, and the Economy. Only eight states have seen unemployment rates for black workers fall below pre-recession levels. In Alabama, the African unemployment rate is more than twice what it was pre-recession: 10.9%, compared with less than 5% throughout 2007…

However, as researchers at the Center for Economic Policy Research have pointed out, that piece of paper is no hedge against unemployment: a 2014 analysis found that 12.4% of black college graduates aged 22 to 27 were unemployed, compared with 5.6% of all college graduates in the same age group.

So what else explains the gap? Unsurprisingly, discrimination appears to be at play. Using what are known as “audit surveys,” researchers have found that black job applicants are less likely to get called back for job interviews or hired, compared with white and Hispanic applicants with identical credentials. One well-known 2009 study byDevah Pager, Bruce Western and Bark Bonikowski used trios of actors, one black, one white, and one Hispanic, to apply for low-wage jobs like sales associate or waiter around New York City. The study found that blacks without a criminal record fared about as well as whites with a stated criminal record (i.e., who listed their parole officers as a reference).  “The findings suggest that a black applicant has to search twice as long as an equally qualified white applicant before receiving a callback or job offer from an employer,” the authors wrote…

African-Americans took one of the hardest hits during the financial crisis, losing one-third of their aggregate household wealth between 2010 and 2013, a Pew Research Center analysis found. Even in a recovery, with so many still looking for work, it’s hard to envision how those families can begin to rebuild.

 
Leave a comment

Posted by on August 6, 2015 in The New Jim Crow

 

Tags: , , , , , ,

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 225 other followers