by Carmen Van Kerckhove

New York City is one of the most ethnically diverse cities in the country, yet many companies here are still doing a poor job when it comes to diversity.

In this week’s issue, Crain’s New York Business has a special section on diversity in the workplace, and the statistics it cites are depressing:

• “In a city that is 25% black, only 2.5% of employees making over $100,000 at the 16 [advertising] agencies examined are black”
• “In the securities industry, minorities make up about 22% of the workforce but are clustered in the lower ranks”
• “A third of law firms in New York don’t have any black or Hispanic partners”

There’s a clear theme emerging: Organizations have become better at recruiting people of color, but many are doing a terrible job of retaining and promoting them.

As I told the reporter at Crain’s, many professionals of color are fed up with doors closing in their faces, and are choosing to leave corporate America altogether. From the article:

At many local companies, minority retention rates are low, and management ranks remain pale. Local experts point to two major problems: uninspired diversity training, and policies that neglect promotion and retention….

An even bigger obstacle to a diverse workforce may be a failure to nurture and promote minority hires.

“A lot of black and Latino professionals end up leaving to start their own businesses in part because they don’t see they have a shot at rising,” says Carmen Van Kerckhove, co-founder and president of New Demographic, a diversity consultancy in Manhattan.

Click here to download a PDF of the article.

by Carmen Van Kerckhove

Addicted to Race Premium is the premium version of New Demographic’s podcast about America’s obsession with race. Every other week, subscribers receive an hour-long, exclusive audio interview with one of the nation’s top experts on race, racism and diversity.

Since this is the public RSS feed, you will receive just a 15-minute preview of the interview. If you’d like to hear the hour-long interview in its entirety, subscribe to Addicted to Race Premium today!

Here’s what you’ll find in this episode:

Dr. Graves explains why race is a social construct and not a biological reality, and debunks some common myths about biology and race. For example, are Kenyans biologically predisposed to winning marathons? And do Asian men really have the smallest penises?

Got feedback for us? Call 917-720-6348 or email info@addictedtorace.com.

Learn more about Addicted to Race Premium.

Dr. Joseph L. Graves is the Dean of University Studies and a professor of biology at North Caroline A&T State University. He is the author of the books The Emperor’s New Clothes: Biological Theories of Race at the Millennium and The Race Myth: Why We Pretend Race Exists in America. His research concerns the evolutionary genetics of postponed aging and biological concepts of race in humans, with over fifty papers and book chapters published, and appearances in six documentary films on these general topics.

Learn more about Addicted to Race Premium.

Duration - 18:15
File Size - 12.6 MB

Right-click here to download an MP3 of Addicted to Race Premium 1
or
Click here to never miss an episode by subscribing to us in iTunes
or
click the button below to play it immediately

by Carmen Van Kerckhove

I’m excited to announce the launch of Addicted to Race Premium, the premium version of our podcast about America’s obsession with race!

Every other week, premium subscribers will receive an hour-long, exclusive audio interview with one of the nation’s top experts on race, racism and diversity.

I decided to start this premium service because so many of you have asked me for a way to enhance your knowledge on these topics, without having to take a long, expensive anti-oppression or diversity training course.

Addicted to Race Premium provides you with a convenient and affordable way to access in-depth — and most importantly — ongoing learning about race, racism and diversity. After all, anti-racism is a journey, not a destination.

Our exclusive expert interviews will help you:

• Learn how to think critically and analyze issues around race and racism.
• Acquire terminology and language that can help you better articulate your experiences and opinions.

Are there any experts you’d love for us to interview, or topics you think we should cover? If so, email me at carmen@newdemographic.com and I’ll do my best to make it happen!

You can get all the details about Addicted to Race Premium here, and I hope you’ll enjoy the preview I’m about to post of our premiere episode. It should give you a flavor for what the interviews will be like.

by Race in the Workplace special correspondent Erica Mauter

University of Arkansas-Little Rock law professor Zachary Kramer has posted a law review article on the Social Science Research Network entitled Heterosexuality and Title VII. The abstract:

There is a double standard at work in employment discrimination cases. While courts frequently reject otherwise actionable sex discrimination claims brought by lesbians and gay employees on the grounds that sexual orientation is not protected under Title VII, no court has ever ruled this way in a case brought by a heterosexual employee. What explains this double standard? The conventional wisdom is that heterosexual employees do not face discrimination on the basis of their sexual orientation. In this Article, I offer a different explanation, one that is rooted in the cultural invisibility of heterosexuality in our society. Because we tend not to think of heterosexuals as having a sexual orientation, courts are unable to see when an employee’s sex discrimination claim implicates her heterosexuality. As a result, heterosexual employees are simply not at risk of losing their sex discrimination claims because of their sexual orientation. Thus heterosexuality and homosexuality are not similarly situated under Title VII. Whereas lesbian and gay employees are burdened by their sexual orientation in employment discrimination law, heterosexual employees are, in effect, privileged by theirs.

This concept is not new and different. We’re all familiar with the various types of privilege (and all the versions of Peggy McIntosh’s Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack), right? Let’s read it again.

Because we tend not to think of heterosexuals as having a sexual orientation, courts are unable to see when an employee’s sex discrimination claim implicates her heterosexuality. As a result, heterosexual employees are simply not at risk of losing their sex discrimination claims because of their sexual orientation.

The world of law review is a little different from the world of sociology. So maybe it is revolutionary for someone to point this out. Farther along in the paper:

The lesson of [the] case is that an employee’s sexual orientation can swallow up an otherwise actionable claim of sex discrimination. Even though [the] Title VII claims were based on her sex and her gender-nonconformity, the court concluded that [she] was trying to bootstrap protection for sexual orientation into Title VII by framing discussion targeted at her sexual orientation as a claim of discrimination based on her gender-nonconformity.

The exact mechanism by which so many discrimination claims get tossed is an interesting reflection on our cultural mindset towards sexual orientation. It might all be a moot point if sexual-orientation were already considered a protected class under Title VII (the employment discrimination section of the Civil Rights Act of 1964) from the standpoint of a legal outcome, but it wouldn’t change the interpretation of the facts as they were presented.

(via Workplace Prof Blog)

See also: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack heterosexual privilege version, Christian privilege version, male privilege version. Enh, just google it.

by Race in the Workplace special correspondent Erica Mauter

“As sexual harassment becomes less acceptable in society, organizations may be more attuned to helping victims, who may therefore find it easier to cope,” said lead author M. Sandy Hershcovis, PhD, of the University of Manitoba. “In contrast, non-violent forms of workplace aggression such as incivility and bullying are not illegal, leaving victims to fend for themselves.”

Hershcovis and co-author Julian Barling, PhD, of Queen’s University in Ontario, Canada, reviewed 110 studies conducted over 21 years that compared the consequences of employees’ experience of sexual harassment and workplace aggression. Specifically, the authors looked at the effect on job, co-worker and supervisor satisfaction, workers’ stress, anger and anxiety levels as well as workers’ mental and physical health. Job turnover and emotional ties to the job were also compared.

The authors distinguished among different forms of workplace aggression. Incivility included rudeness and discourteous verbal and non-verbal behaviors. Bullying included persistently criticizing employees’ work; yelling; repeatedly reminding employees of mistakes; spreading gossip or lies; ignoring or excluding workers; and insulting employees’ habits, attitudes or private life. Interpersonal conflict included behaviors that involved hostility, verbal aggression and angry exchanges.

“Bullying is often more subtle, and may include behaviors that do not appear obvious to others,” said Hershcovis. “For instance, how does an employee report to their boss that they have been excluded from lunch? Or that they are being ignored by a coworker? The insidious nature of these behaviors makes them difficult to deal with and sanction.”

In short, people being jerks makes other people feel like crap. And people being jerks makes people feel crappier than sexual harassment because the victims have less recourse against jerks than they do against sexual harassers.

Since there’s absolutely no mention of race in this write up, I’m wondering if they purposely ignored any race aspects of these bullying and harassment cases, or if the racial identity of the study subjects was purposely omitted.

If the bully doesn’t make a specifically racial comment, but you feel you’re unfairly treated and you happen to be the only person of color or only person of a certain race, is that enough to allege racial discrimination?

Would a victim who is a person of color perceive the bullying differently than a white victim? Would a white victim who is in the minority in their workplace perceive the bullying differently?

Does a lawsuit have a better chance if the premise is discrimination based on race rather than bullying?

(via Paula Brantner’s Twitter)

American Psychological Association. “Bullying More Harmful Than Sexual Harassment On The Job, Say Researchers.” ScienceDaily 9 March 2008. 18 March 2008 <http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2008/03/080308090927.htm>.

by Special Correspondent Adina Ba

An African American partner from a prestigious international law firm was sitting in a conference room prior to a negotiation that would determine whether her client’s corporation would emerge victorious in a multi-billion-dollar acquisition. The lawyer for the target company arrived and asked her to make copies, assuming she was a secretary or paralegal. She made the copies, reviewing the documents her opposing counsel was bringing to the negotiation. She then introduced herself and took the lead in the meeting. She later charged him the appropriate portion of her $800-per-hour billing rate for the photocopying time.

This story is but one example of mistaken identity experienced by 12.7% of respondents who participated in the 2007 Corporate Leavers Survey (pdf), which found that over 2 million managers and professionals leave their jobs every year solely due to unfairness in the workplace at an annual cost of $64 billion to companies. Other examples of unfairness and bias experienced by corporate leavers include:

• Being asked to attend more recruiting or community related events than one’s colleagues
• Being passed over for promotion due to personal characteristics
• Being publicly humiliated
• Being bullied
• Receiving unwelcome questions about skin, hair or ethnic attire
• Being compared to a terrorist in a joking or serious manner

Workplace diversity and fairness expert Freada Kapor Klein is the founder of the Level Playing Field Institute. She tells the story above and examines these trends in her book Giving Notice: Why the Best and the Brightest Leave the Workplace and How You Can Help Them Stay.

Your research claims that the true cost of hidden bias in the workplace is $64 billion annually. Many employers focus on costs of possible lawsuits as the only cost of workplace bias, but your work aims to debunk that myth. What are your comments on this?

(# of professionals & managers in US labor force) X
(% of professionals & managers who left solely due to unfairness) X
(1.5 total annual compensation of professionals & managers) =
(Cost of voluntary turnover due solely to unfairness)

For every dimension of this calculation, we took the most conservative estimate. This is not the outside extreme example, but rather the minimum. An additional statistic which is not included in our cost estimate is that 13% of those who left solely due to unfairness actively discouraged others from buying their former employers’ products or services. It directly cuts into the bottom line in a number of dimensions.

Why do you recommend having only one training program in a company instead of having sexual harassment training and diversity training separated out? Any suggestions on how this can be done?

Separate sexual harassment training is a real problem. It signals that that issue is more important than other issues. Yes, sexual harassment is an important issue, but I suggest CEOs initiate one overall policy for “diversity” or “anti-harassment” which covers all fairness practices in the workplace, including dismantling stereotypes and assumptions of all sexes and all peoples. Continue Reading »

• Diversity: More than a PC word in school, at work - www.kansascity.com
  “Diversity requires most whites to give up something — controlling power,” Moore said. “But I’d like people to see it this way: They’re really not giving up something. They’re taking on something — different perspectives.”
  (tags: racism privilege education)
• ‘Diversity’ Defined in Less than a Third of Workplaces - Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)
  “Organizations believe workplace diversity is important—but only 30 percent have an official definition of it. And, there is no common language to guide companies in managing their diversity efforts.”
  (tags: workplace diversity)
• EEOC sues Oregon City Fred Meyer for sexual harassment - OregonLive.com
  “The commission said Fred Meyer allowed top-level managers to sexually harass several female employees and then retaliated against the woman who first complained to her bosses.”
  (tags: workplace sexism retaliation discrimination sexualharassment)
• Discrimination Claims Against City Parks Department - Hudson Valley Press
  “New York City has agreed to pay more than $21 million to settle a federal class action lawsuit alleging race and national origin discrimination against the New York City Parks Department.”
  (tags: racism workplace discrimination)

by Race in the Workplace special correspondent Erica Mauter

The Wall Street Journal reports that — surprise! — a ridiculous pay gap still exists between white men and everyone else.

I keep hearing that diversity in the workplace will only improve if it’s perceived as a business incentive. Change only happens in Corporate America if it’s a business incentive.

What will it take to change this picture at a time of fierce competition for a shrinking number of management jobs? It requires business chiefs who understand that diversity is good for the bottom line because it enables them to recruit the best talent, enlist broad thinking and reach diverse customers world-wide. And it requires CEOs to link their managers’ compensation to achieving more diversity while offering development programs for all employees.

What about it just being the right thing to do? Saving on head count is smart for your business, so if you can get away with paying your women and minorities less, you’re saving your business some money, right?

So “business incentive” will probably end up meaning something more like “legal incentive.” As long as the EEOC has no money, it has no teeth, but there is at least one example of a state having the initiative to enact its own pay equity legislation (Minnesota). (More on all that in this Race in the Workplace interview with Evelyn Murphy, author of Getting Even: Why Women Don’t Get Paid Like Men – And What to Do About It.)

That the pay gap exists so soon after college clearly indicates that women and minorities are being discriminated against from the get-go. There hasn’t been any time for them to demonstrate that “they deserve less” for whatever myriad bullshit reasons.

True, progress in the executive ranks can only be made one appointment at a time. But the numbers are small enough that we can’t hold our breath on every rise and fall. Every new black CEO, every new female SVP, every new Chief Diversity Officer is going to significantly impact the percentages of non-white-male people holding those roles.

This is not news. It’s appalling, but it’s not news.

by Race in the Workplace special correspondent Erica Mauter

Manpower VP Melanie Holmes on being busy:

Here’s how I feel about busy vs. boredom:

• We’ve all heard the adage that if you give something to a busy person it will get done. I believe it!
• I get frustrated when people say they’re busy as if that is a bad thing.
• And you could consider busy a form of job security.

We should be grateful that we’re busy. That probably means we’re relevant to our employers and we’re making a contribution to the success of the company. On busy days I go home feeling much, much better about myself than when I don’t check off quite as many items from my ‘to do’ list.

My boss once told me, “the more you have to do, the more you get done.” This was great feedback to hear, considering I’m usually a terrible procrastinator. Extremely close deadlines are my greatest (external) motivator. I’m also the sort of person that will break a task down into ridiculously small parts and/or add things I already did to my to-do list just so I can cross them off.

I think I’m not alone here. Right?

But I’m never hurting for things to do. Good thing.

Although being overworked may lead to employee burnout, boredom due to poor job design or other factors actually may have more serious consequences, according to research by Sirota Survey Intelligence… Employees who express boredom because of too little work reported “far lower levels of job satisfaction, sense of accomplishment and pride” in their companies when compared with other groups of workers. The boredom has nothing to do with employees not having enough work. Rather, it stems mostly from two causes: employees occupying jobs for which they are not suited or trained, or jobs that are poorly designed…

So if you’re bored at work, ask for more to do. Or fill your time with an extracurricular that’s going to help you advance in your job. You need to be able to (honestly) tell your boss what (work-related things) you’ve been doing all week. It’s the best way to address a needy boss’s need for face time. Otherwise you’ll never score those newfangled Results-Oriented Working Hours.

Back to Melanie Holmes’ statement on job security… Imagine this scenario: You’re busy. Everyone else is busy. Someone quits and you all get busier. You’re high performers so you manage to handle it (and kudos to you for that). But unless the workload is really unmanageable, they’re going to realize maybe they don’t need to hire a replacement anytime soon. Which means maybe they could do without you.

So don’t just be busy. Just being busy is not a guarantee. You must also be relevant to the important parts of the business. And make sure you know what those important parts are.

• A Modern Conundrum: When Work’s Invisible, So Are Its Satisfactions - WSJ.com
  “In the past, people could see the fruits of their labor immediately: a chair made or a ball bearing produced. But it can be hard to find gratification from work that is largely invisible, or from delivering goods that are often metaphorical.”
  (tags: workplace jobsatisfaction management)
• Business Books: The post-feminist route to the top - Guardian
  “she advises women who want to overtake men in the race for the inner circle of business to use the arts of seduction and manipulation, or, as she puts it, S&M… “The art of S&M is about getting what we want”
  (tags: workplace gender sexism)
• Racial-harassment complaints shoot up — OrlandoSentinel.com
  “In time for Black History Month, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission disclosed its latest tally of racial-harassment cases. And the news isn’t good. Cases of racial harassment reported to the EEOC jumped 24 percent last year”
  (tags: workplace eeoc discrimination racism)
• Are girls wired not to win? - Times Online
  “In a controversial new book, psychologist Susan Pinker uncovers the workings of the hormone oxytocin, which she claims explains why females are biologically driven to nurture their young rather than climb the corporate ladder”
  (tags: gender workplace career worklifebalance)

• When Separate, But Equal Works - Hartford Business
  “Companies that establish employee networking groups as a benefit to employees are also reaping some rewards — an in-house focus group to help tackle new markets.”
  (tags: diversity workplace race networking)
• Ha-Ha, You’re Fired! - Forbes.com
  “it is becoming harder to avoid crossing the line into offensive territory, due in part to the ease of electronic communication and the workplace’s growing attunement to cultural diversity and worker sensitivity.”
  (tags: communication workplace hostileenvironment)
• Panel: Diversity lags at financial institutions - Charlotte Observer
  “the percentage of women and minorities in high-level positions has probably been exaggerated because of the way certain jobs have been categorized…”
  (tags: diversity workplace finance)
• Cool reception for Asia’s gay workers - FTD.de
  “Lehman Brothers is not the only bank seeking to recruit from Asia’s gay community. Such is the enthusiasm among investment banks that some have banded together to give their Asian events a higher profile”
  (tags: glbt diversity workplace)

by Race in the Workplace special correspondent Erica Mauter

There’s been an ongoing conversation on Glenn Sacks’ blog about whether women are taken seriously and the inherent inequality in the way women’s actions are perceived in our society. One of his regular readers, a long-time engineer named Dave K, submitted a superb analysis of how diversity programs can backfire. The whole conversation initially revolved around gender differences. As Dave K describes, the concept applies to any minority.

Most large companies have diversity programs, and those programs encourage business groups to maintain a diverse workforce (gender, race primarily). I think this is a healthy goal, and certainly makes for a more interesting work environment, but it often results in pressure to choose candidates based more on diversity considerations than on merit, and this causes a cascade of problems for companies… I can say for sure that one result of this is a backlash against those benefiting from such programs…

[I]n our litigious nation there is a real bottom line exposure for companies who step even an inch out of line to what the flavor of the month government policy is. Personally I think there IS a justification for these programs, but all too often I hear people who are the beneficiaries of such programs bemoaning the inevitable backlash without any inkling that there are valid reasons for coworkers to be upset. NOBODY likes to watch a mid-performing coworker get promoted over them based on their race or gender, and even someone like myself who understands the reasoning behind it finds it a bitter pill…

Of course the other downside from this reality is that if a person belongs to the benefiting group, they will be seen by coworkers that don’t know them as unfairly gaining even if they ARE the person most deserving a promotion or gain…

[W]e as humans tend to really take notice of thing we see as unjust toward us, and we often aren’t as sensitive to things that benefit us at another’s expense. White Male engineers see a female or black engineer promoted and from personal experience with the person we know it’s not through merit… and we see blatant injustice. That person no doubt feels he/she deserved the promotion, so when the that person feels the backlash … they see blatant injustice too. Doubly cursed is the promoted person who truly deserved it, because that persons accomplishment will be tainted unjustly.

Discrimination is ALWAYS going to create these sorts of situations… so when I read an article where a person who may have benefited from institutionalized discrimination bemoans what could very well be understandable backlash from those who are most certainly the victims of it, I understand where everyone’s coming from. I truly feel bad for the talented woman or minority who gets labeled unjustly, but I also feel bad for those (lets face it) white men who have been embittered by what is essentially state sponsored discrimination. In the end I HOPE that this period of turmoil will end with companies being able to shift toward true meritocracy.

I think he explains the conundrum pretty well. I’ll take it one step further: Another consequence is that the minority person who deservingly gets the promotion may begin to doubt their own abilities due to backlash from co-workers.

Shifting towards true meritocracy assumes everyone fairly gets into the pool in the first place. The problem with affirmative action — and with abolishing it — is that it is so far-reaching, because the problems it’s trying to correct are so far-reaching. If we could ensure that everyone had equal access to quality primary and secondary education, then there would most certainly be a workforce that is reflective of the general population at all levels of management. Unfortunately, that’s still not the case.

All the youngish white guys that I know are sensitive to the issue, have a bit of a resigned attitude about it all, and are even a little sheepish. Thing is, I don’t see any of them hurting for job prospects, either.

by Carmen Van Kerckhove

Do you read Race in the Workplace religiously, but want to take your understanding of race and racism to the next level?

Then join New Demographic’s Anti-Racism Action Group! There are just 12 spots so if you’re interested, click here to register as soon as possible. Below is more information.

Anti-Racism Action Group

What is it?

The Anti-Racism Action Group is a 9-week-long course that takes an in-depth look at race, racism, privilege, and stereotypes. You can participate no matter where you are located geographically. In order to provide you with personal attention, we limit each group to just 12 participants. The next one starts on Wednesday, February 27th, 2008. That group will meet by phone every Wednesday evening at 5:30 Pacific / 8:30 pm Eastern. The last call will take place on Wednesday, April 23rd.

What’s unique about the course?

In-depth
You will engage in an in-depth study of race and racism. Taking a single workshop — even if it’s a day-long workshop — only allows you to scratch the surface. The Anti-Racism Action Group, on the other hand, gives you time to thoroughly explore and process new ideas.

Action-oriented
You will actively engage with the material and think about how it applies in your life. It’s easy to space out while listening to an audio seminar or a diversity speaker. The Anti-Racism Action Group’s action-oriented format, on the other hand, ensures that you don’t fall into the trap of passive learning.

Personal
You will get to know your fellow group members, learn from each other and develop personal bonds. In a typical diversity training setting, the speaker drones on and on to an anonymous mass of people. The Anti-Racism Action Group’s discussions, on the other hand, are driven by your stories, experiences, and analyses.

How does it work?

1. Phone sessions
At the heart of the program are 9 weekly 90-minute group discussions that New Demographic’s co-founder and president Carmen Van Kerckhove facilitates by phone. She’ll use a telephone bridge line that you can access from anywhere in the world. During 5 of the 9 phone sessions, you will discuss the reading and writing assignments. The other phone sessions will be more free-form. You can ask the group for advice with real-life situations, discuss current events, just chat and get to know one another, etc. You will receive audio recordings of each phone session so that you can review what was covered.

2. Reading and writing assignments
Every other week, you will receive a reading and writing assignment on a specific topic. You will read the material assigned (up to 50 pages) and write a few paragraphs in response to questions that Carmen poses to you. You will share this writing assignment with the other members of your group and discuss them on that week’s call. The writing assignments are designed to make you engage with the material and reflect on how it relates to your personal experiences. So don’t worry about being judged on your writing ability!

3. Small group
The Anti-Racism Action Group is deliberately limited to just 12 participants. Not only will this ensure that you receive the personal attention and support you need, but you will also be able to build relationships with the other members of the group. You will all learn from each other in this small, intimate setting. Continue Reading »

by Race in the Workplace special correspondent Erica Mauter

Everybody will be talking about Super Duper Tuesday.

In response to surveys indicating increased political discussion in the workplace, Anita Bruzzese sayeth:

These growing numbers have me wondering how much influence our workplace culture, co-workers and bosses influence our votes. If we’re spending 10 to 12 hours a day with other employees, might they have a bigger impact on our decisions? Will we vote the way the boss does just to get in good with a manager? Can who we vote for adversely impact a career?

The obvious first response to encountering political discussion in the workplace is to wonder how this new-found knowledge impacts your opinion of your co-workers. When people you know outside of the workplace express political opinions, you have more latitude in your response. Your co-workers you are stuck with.

I’d certainly puzzle over how to manage my response (or lack thereof) to someone with different political beliefs, but it wouldn’t even occur to me that I might act, much less vote differently to improve my boss’s perception of me. If my stellar performance isn’t already doing it, we’re now talking faking a whole outlook on life.

But if your work environment is that hostile to your political beliefs you have two options.

1. Learn to keep your mouth shut. Accept that fact that other people won’t and you might not like what they have to say, then figure out how to maintain a civil working relationship with them. Just because some of your co-workers disagree doesn’t mean that the company’s values are out of line with yours or that you all of a sudden hate your job.
2. Quit. I know of a guy who left a job at a startup after two weeks because the newer new guy referred to people as “coloreds”. (I know!!!) Some things you just can’t work around. That was maybe more an example of ignorance and/or bigotry, but suppose he’d said “abolish Roe vs Wade” or “build a wall at the border” instead.

Back to Anita’s statement, there is some merit to the question of whether these people we spend so many hours of a day with can influence our political choices. If anything, being forced to deal with their differing political positions in a workplace setting (i.e., in a rational and diplomatic manner) changes the way you have these discussions and maybe everybody will learn something in the process.

Or maybe your entire department caucused for Barack Obama. Team building, anyone?

This year’s election is historic. People pay more attention to politics as they age. The topic will inevitably come up. Your politics are as much a part of you as your family and your hobbies. It’s unrealistic to expect to avoid politics all together in the workplace.

• Working with diversity - Professional Roofing Magazine
  “you must recognize you react to some employees differently than you react to others. If you acknowledge this fact, you will be able to manage relationships more effectively and work to change your biases. “
  (tags: workplace diversity bias prejudice)
• Understanding America’s racial divide drives Pager’s work - Princeton University
  “Her results were disturbing: A white man with a criminal record was slightly more likely to be considered for a job than a black man with no criminal past. The study won the American Sociological Association’s Dissertation Award.”
  (tags: workplace racism jobsearch)
• SalesGenie’s Super Bowl ads are super offensive to Indian and Chinese workers - Work in Progress - Worklife - Workplace - TIME
  “my Asian colleagues in journalism are fuming today about two spots from the same company, SalesGenie.com. One involves an Indian salesman, Ramesh, who explains in a thick accent to an impatient boss that he has seven children.”
  (tags: workplace racism stereotypes advertising)
• Voicemail rules - Daily Freeman
  “If you would like to leave a long, rambling message with no apparent point, please hang up now. If you are calling to verify that your e-mail has been received, please go outside and do five laps around the block.”
  (tags: communication workplace)

• R Yr Biznes E-mails Hrting Yr Career?
  “It can be tricky sending business e-mails in a work force that encompasses diversity of race/ethnicity, gender, age, religion, disability and other cultural influences…four tips from national experts on sending business e-mails”
  (tags: workplace communication email diversity)
• Office Politics - Forbes.com
  “Plenty of chief executives support candidates publicly and financially…It raises the question: Can working for a boss who supports a candidate benefit or hurt your career?”
  (tags: workplace politics)

by Race in the Workplace special correspondent Erica Mauter

Aka, the Civil Rights Act of 2008.

According to Jeffery Hirsch at Workplace Prof Blog, H.R.5129/S.2554 looks like an employee discrimination law wishlist.

He gives the Cliffs Notes version of the bill:

The Act would do the following:

• eliminate the 1991 Civil Rights Act damage caps under Title VII and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA),
• amend the Equal Pay Act (EPA) to allow the “bona fide factor other than sex” defense only if an employer shows that the factor was job-related was actually used and further legitimate business purposes,
• adds compensatory and punitive damages to the Fair Labor Standards Act’s (FLSA) remedial framework (which includes the EPA),
• amends the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) to prohibit clauses requiring arbitration of federal constitution or statutory claims, unless parties knowingly and voluntarily consented after the dispute arises, or as part of a collective bargaining agreement,
• allow winning plaintiffs to recover expert fees and expand the definition of prevailing party,
• give the NLRB authority to award backpay to undocumented workers,
• provide individuals the right to sue federally funded programs under Title VI, Title IX, the Rehabilitation Act, and the ADA,
• require that ADEA disparate impact claims be analyzed the same as Title VII claims,
• condition states’ receipts of federal funds on states’ waiver of sovereign immunity against individual claims for monetary damages under the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), the FLSA, and Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act (USERRA).

So it basically addresses who else can sue who for what and for how much. Professor Hirsch then says:

I don’t imagine that it’ll go anywhere unless there is a President Clinton or Obama, but no doubt it will be campaign fodder until then.

Now isn’t that cynical? Except that he’s absolutely right.

Many of these measures just make sense. Especially in cases where the proposed legislation is calling a more fair, uniform application of an existing policy. But if it were all that easy to do and everyone were that on board with the concept, it would have been done already.

One would think with the copious amounts of discrimination and employment case law to draw from that crafting and enacting such an Act would be pretty straightforward. We’re all pretty clear on the idea that race-based discrimination is wrong. It’s not as if it’s a “moral” issue that we all have different opinions on and thus we keep on discriminating in the name of religious freedom, right? (Gay Marriage, I’m looking at you.)

It’s a shame that anyone would doubt we could pass a Civil Rights Act. Hopefully the tide is turning (pdf).

• Cubicle Culture - WSJ.com
  “English speakers seem to have many words that are innocuous on one side of the Atlantic but are offensive enough on the other side that they’ll go unmentioned here. “
  (tags: language international workplace)
• Retaliation lawsuits under fire :: CHICAGO SUN-TIMES :: Business
  “Next month, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear arguments in the race discrimination case to decide whether retaliation claims can continue to be brought under one of the country’s oldest federal civil rights laws — statute 1981 under the 1866 Civil Rights
  (tags: discrimination workplace racism retaliation)
• Asking for a Raise - The Career Encouragement Blog
  “If your boss gives you a sincere compliment, give a sincere thanks in return and bask in the joy of doing good work. Don’t respond like a first-grader with “so what will you give me…”"
  (tags: salary compensation careeradvice)

• Broken heart? Take a leave - Work in Progress - Worklife - Workplace - TIME
  “Lovelorn staff at a Japanese marketing company can take paid time off after a bad break-up with a partner…I can’t decide if this company is really woman-friendly, or if…sets the already bass-ackwards women’s movement in Japan back another century.”
  (tags: gender workplace worklifebalance)
• Workplace Drama Leads To Diversity - FP Posted
  Accenture “is sending employees on workplace diversity training — a fine idea, turned into bizarre pageant. The training will be delivered by ‘Steps’, one of Europe’s premier providers of drama-based learning’…
  (tags: diversitytraining workplace)
• Bridging the age gap - Mainebiz
  “Experts on generations at work say this is the first time in history that four generations of workers — people born anytime from the 1920s to 1989 — are sharing office space.”
  (tags: diversity workplace generations age)
• English is for Business. Spanish is for Gossiping - Mi blog es tu blog
  ““Spanish is not associated with business connections. It’s associated with gossiping or wasting time,” she said. ¡Pero mamita! Doesn’t she know we Latinas like el chisme and wasting time in both, English and Spanish?”
  (tags: workplace language hispanic latino)

by Carmen Van Kerckhove

We’re used to thinking of racial discrimination as something that occurs between people from different racial groups.

But is it possible for a person to engage in racial discrimination against a coworker of his own race? It’s not as common, but it can happen. I recently spoke to the restaurant industry trade publication QSR on this topic.

So, what would possibly cause a person to engage in same-race discrimination?

1. They buy into negative stereotypes about their own race

All of us have been inundated throughout our lives with racist stereotypes perpetuated by the media and other social institutions. It’s impossible not to have internalized some of these racist beliefs — even those about our own racial group.

But some folks have internalized these negative beliefs to a far greater degree than others, turning these beliefs into outright racial self-hatred. These people genuinely believe negative stereotypes about their own race, and this leads them to discriminate against those like themselves.

2. They think it’s a good career move

If you can’t beat’em, join’em, as the cliché goes. In a workplace where people of a certain racial group are already being discriminated against, joining in the discrimination could be seen by some as a way to climb the corporate ladder:

Van Kerckhove says some instigators might also see race-on-race harassment as a way to politically advance themselves in the company, but that racial discrimination—even if it’s inadvertent—has to be present initially.

“That could happen in a workplace where there already is racial discrimination,” Van Kerckhove says. “One group isn’t advancing where others are. In a case like that, even if they don’t believe anyone is inferior, they may treat others that way to advance their own cause.”

3. They want to distance themselves from the stereotype

Discriminating against people of their own race is a way to separate themselves; to prove to others that they’re “not one of those.”

Carmen Van Kerckhove, co-founder of New Demographic, a company that facilitates conversations about race in the workplace and at seminars, says another reason race-on-race harassment occurs is that “it’s a reaction against negative stereotypes of your own race.” This twisted logic dictates that if an employee separates himself from his own race—by disdaining it or criticizing it—he will prevent himself from being judged according to those stereotypes.

4. They are prejudiced against a specific ethnicity or class

What looks to others like same-race discrimination may actually have nothing to do with race at all. There are ethnic groups, for example, that distrust each other due to historically strained relationships. In other cases, the prejudice may be based on socio-economic factors:

In some racial groups, there is a pecking order, particularly among Hispanics who might condescend based on the length of time a person has been in the U.S., which is sometimes seen as a status symbol.

“If you don’t understand the language, all of this could be going on and you’re unaware of it,” Fernandez says. “If you don’t speak the language, you’ve got to have somebody who’s bilingual who can speak the language. You’ve got to make it crystal clear to them that our culture is not going to tolerate this classism, sexism, and racism. If the company sets up standards that there’s zero tolerance around that, they figure it out.”