Abstract
Our knowledge of trends in labor force inequality comes primarily from studies of how individuals in different status categories are distributed across jobs or industries. As Stainback and Tomaskovic-Devey note, such studies can be misleading because they leave out the organizations in which people are employed and where decisions are made about who gets which jobs. In Documenting Desegregation, Stainback and Tomaskovic-Devey analyze data on more than 5 million private-sector establishments from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission EEO-1 Reports from 1966 to 2005 that enable them to sort out changes in employment practices from shifts in occupations, industries, and regions over different time periods. Their goal for the book, however, is even more ambitious because they also want to examine how both external influences (social, political, and economic) and internal constituencies affect decisions at the organizational level. They argue that to understand workforce inequality, one has to study work places, and to understand what has changed in terms of who has access to which jobs, one has to look over time at what employers are actually doing.
Anyone interested in human resource practices, diversity, inequality, and political economy should be interested in this book. It is a major achievement and a welcome addition to the research on employment and civil rights. The EEO-1 data have only recently become available for research purposes, and the authors have stepped up to the challenge by providing a thorough, thoughtful, and theoretically grounded set of analyses that answer fundamental questions about labor force inequality. Specifically, they endeavor to answer what progress has been made in desegregating the workforce, who has benefited most and least from the efforts, whether the changes are due to employers’ decisions, economic growth, or decline in jobs, industries, or regions, and what external and internal influences have most shaped these changes at the level of organizational practice. The availability of these data and the skill and care of the analyses set this book apart from previous research that has tried to explain the impact of the Civil Rights Act on labor force changes. The findings from these analyses are startling and should elicit additional responses from employers and policy makers alike.
Stainback and Tomaskovic-Devey find that passage of the Civil Rights Act led to reduced segregation between white and black men from 1966 through the 1970s, but additional progress for black men ended after 1980. There was little change in the segregation between white men and white women in the 1960s and 1970s, but such segregation decreased in the 1980s, slowed in the 1990s, and stabilized thereafter. Changes in the segregation of black women were more limited, with initial decreased segregation from both white men and women only in the 1970s, but then renewed segregation from white women as white women increasingly moved into positions with white men. Perhaps one of the most noteworthy findings in the book is that since the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1966, the representation of white men in the best jobs has actually increased in proportion. Whatever changes occurred for other groups was not at the expense of white men. Instead, as white women and black men and women moved into lower-status jobs, white men were pushed up.
While the overall trends are general, the authors pay attention to variations in terms of types of jobs, industry, and region. They find that the continued privileged position of white men is especially evident in managerial, professional, and craft jobs—i.e., the jobs that pay the most and are considered the most desirable. The authors find, however, that professional jobs provide somewhat more opportunity for women and minorities because of the credentials needed for such positions. White men continue to be most represented in those industries that pay the most, while white women and black men and women have gained a greater foothold in industries that pay less. The findings also support the notion of a status hierarchy. White men manage all other groups, while white women tend to manage other women; black men generally manage other black men and sometimes black women; and black women often manage only other black women.
Perhaps the most innovative aspect of this work is the effort to show that external forces and internal constituents have influenced organizational practices and decision making. In other words, the book tries to take seriously the idea that legislation in itself does not lead to automatic changes in the behavior of those it is intended to change, nor does issuing new organizational policies necessarily lead to changes in organizational practice. Stainback and Tomaskovic-Devey argue that external “pressure” has contributed to organizational responses, depending on the uncertainty that organizations faced and on the strength of institutional practices that either resisted or facilitated change. In making this argument, the authors divide their analyses into periods that reflect changing social, political, and economic dynamics. The book provides some background on the period prior to the passage of the Civil Rights Act and then analyzes changes from 1966 to 1972, which is defined as an era in which the meaning of the legislation was being negotiated in the courts and in companies; from 1972 to 1980, when enforcement was greatest but when social movement influences shifted from civil rights to the women’s movement; and then from 1980 to 2005, a period that saw the emergence of renewed resistance to civil rights legislation and the growth of neoliberalism. Surprisingly, Stainback and Tomaskovic-Devey find that in this most recent, new conservative period, when enforcement of civil rights regulations was weakened and less attention was paid to the outcomes of employment decisions in companies, there was a resegregation both between white and black women and between white and black men. In other words, in some industries and in some parts of the country, there has been a reversal of the influences that previously contributed to desegregation, especially by race and among women. The authors attribute the changes in the impact of civil rights over time to the rise and fall of social movements, changes in the economy, the growing influence of neoliberalism, and other political dynamics.
The authors also show how human resource professionals became an internal constituency with a vested interest in the growing diversity of the labor force. They argue that the increasing number of female human resource managers contributed to the development and institutionalization of organizational practices and that, in general, workplaces with greater representation of women and minority workers are also likely to have greater representation of women and minorities in managerial positions. They further argue that the formalization of organizational practices—for example, with regard to diversity—contributes to greater desegregation than is evident in workplaces without more formal practices. Ideally, Stainback and Tomaskovic-Devey would like to see their work contribute to the adoption of workplace practices that will further the goals of civil rights and desegregation. Specifically, they call for more objective criteria and greater accountability on the part of managers in hiring and promotion decisions.
Despite my enthusiasm for the book, I do have some questions and perhaps quibbles. Most important is that despite the authors’ effort to link the empirical analyses to a historical and political context, there is so much material in the book, which sweeps across time periods, status categories, levels of analysis, and context, that it is all too easy to lose the forest for the trees. It is hard to find a clear summary of the major findings in the introduction, conclusion, or chapter summaries along the way. It requires a careful reading to make sure that the message taken away is the one that was intended. It is, though, well worth the effort. The intent of the book—to “bring the firm back in” and lodge the main points of action in organizations and workplace practice—is admirable but also contributes, in my view, to giving too much attention to the negotiations that were likely among legislators, company representatives, and the legal system, while underplaying the likely influence of riots, the anti-war movement in the 1960s, and the global restructuring of the economy that turned the attention of the population away from civil rights and toward economic issues. And although there is some discussion of neoliberalism, I do not think sufficient attention is given to the emergence of a new conservative movement that has made civil rights legislation one of its key targets. The book is already long and complex, however, and no book can do everything. This one does plenty.
Documenting Desegregation offers an impressive contribution to the study of civil rights and workplace inequality. It is comprehensive, insightful, and well documented throughout. The book is theoretically well grounded, and the analyses are sophisticated. Furthermore, the findings are important and should shape the foundation of new efforts to further civil rights protections in the workplace.