Race and Sex in Organizing Work: 'Diversity,' Discrimination, and Integration

Tristin K. Green
{"title":"Race and Sex in Organizing Work: 'Diversity,' Discrimination, and Integration","authors":"Tristin K. Green","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1490030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This Article provides the first extended analysis of the conscious use of race and sex in decisions organizing work. It takes the position that race and sex are being used in organizing work-in assigning clients and job tasks, in composing work teams, in staffing committees and outreach groups-and that they are being used pursuant to a “diversity” narrative in ways that are likely to entrench workplace inequality. At the same time, it argues that race and sex could be used in those same decisions to reduce workplace discrimination and to further equality in work. Drawing on a rich body of research in sociology, social psychology, and organizational theory, the Article exposes the risks and possibilities of race and sex in organizing work by focusing on the role that social interactions play in producing and reproducing disadvantage and on the role of organizational and institutional structures in shaping those interactions. Based on this empirical foundation and on the Supreme Court case law governing the use of race and sex in employment decisions under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Article advances a comprehensive approach to the permissibility of race and sex in decisions organizing work. It argues that Title VII permits the use of race and sex in decisions organizing work to serve the goal of reducing employment discrimination, provided that individual race- and sex-based decisions are part of an employer’s systemic integrative effort. This approach recognizes that decisions organizing work differ from decisions at moments of entry, promotion, and exit in ways that matter to an antidiscrimination analysis. They are “softer” in that their benefits and harms are not always immediately discernable, and they can impose costs as well as benefits on women and people of color, even when they are intended to (and do) further antidiscrimination goals. The approach to Title VII developed in this Article accounts for these differences and offers a unique opportunity to harness the existing business case for diversity to progress meaningful integration in work and to foster reduced workplace discrimination.","PeriodicalId":81162,"journal":{"name":"Emory law journal","volume":"59 1","pages":"585"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-05-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.2139/SSRN.1490030","citationCount":"8","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Emory law journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1490030","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

Abstract

This Article provides the first extended analysis of the conscious use of race and sex in decisions organizing work. It takes the position that race and sex are being used in organizing work-in assigning clients and job tasks, in composing work teams, in staffing committees and outreach groups-and that they are being used pursuant to a “diversity” narrative in ways that are likely to entrench workplace inequality. At the same time, it argues that race and sex could be used in those same decisions to reduce workplace discrimination and to further equality in work. Drawing on a rich body of research in sociology, social psychology, and organizational theory, the Article exposes the risks and possibilities of race and sex in organizing work by focusing on the role that social interactions play in producing and reproducing disadvantage and on the role of organizational and institutional structures in shaping those interactions. Based on this empirical foundation and on the Supreme Court case law governing the use of race and sex in employment decisions under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, the Article advances a comprehensive approach to the permissibility of race and sex in decisions organizing work. It argues that Title VII permits the use of race and sex in decisions organizing work to serve the goal of reducing employment discrimination, provided that individual race- and sex-based decisions are part of an employer’s systemic integrative effort. This approach recognizes that decisions organizing work differ from decisions at moments of entry, promotion, and exit in ways that matter to an antidiscrimination analysis. They are “softer” in that their benefits and harms are not always immediately discernable, and they can impose costs as well as benefits on women and people of color, even when they are intended to (and do) further antidiscrimination goals. The approach to Title VII developed in this Article accounts for these differences and offers a unique opportunity to harness the existing business case for diversity to progress meaningful integration in work and to foster reduced workplace discrimination.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
组织工作中的种族和性别:“多样性”、歧视和融合
本文首次对在组织工作的决策中有意识地使用种族和性别进行了扩展分析。它的立场是,种族和性别被用于组织工作——在分配客户和工作任务、组成工作团队、人事委员会和外联小组中——而且它们被用于“多样性”叙事的方式,可能会加剧工作场所的不平等。与此同时,它认为种族和性别可以在这些相同的决定中使用,以减少工作场所的歧视并进一步促进工作中的平等。本文借鉴了社会学、社会心理学和组织理论方面的大量研究成果,通过关注社会互动在产生和再现劣势方面所起的作用,以及组织和制度结构在形成这些互动方面所起的作用,揭示了种族和性别在组织工作中的风险和可能性。基于这一经验基础和最高法院判例法,根据《民权法案》第七章规定在就业决定中使用种族和性别,该条款提出了一种全面的方法来解决在组织工作的决定中允许种族和性别的问题。它认为,第七章允许在决定组织工作时使用种族和性别,以服务于减少就业歧视的目标,前提是基于种族和性别的个人决定是雇主系统性综合努力的一部分。这种方法认识到,在反歧视分析中,组织工作的决策不同于入职、晋升和离职时的决策。它们之所以“更软”,是因为它们的好处和坏处并不总是能立即被察觉,而且它们可能给女性和有色人种带来好处的同时也会带来成本,即使它们是为了进一步实现反歧视目标(而且确实如此)。本文开发的第七章方法解释了这些差异,并提供了一个独特的机会来利用现有的商业案例多样性来推进工作中有意义的整合,并促进减少工作场所的歧视。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Suing The NRA for Damages National Personal Jurisdiction Partisan Gerrymandering and the Constitutionalization of Statistics THE CASE FOR STREAMLINING EMERGENCY DECLARATION AUTHORITIES AND ADAPTING LEGAL REQUIREMENTS TO EVER-CHANGING PUBLIC HEALTH THREATS. Biometric Cyberintelligence and the Posse Comitatus Act
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1