Should Race Be An Option Put On Job Resume and School Test?
Debate Rounds (5)
(1) It is necessary for statistical analysis. The analyses can be used to ensure equality between races. How would you know if an employer compensates one race more than another if we don't know the races of employees to begin with? Same logic for tests (how do we know if a test question is racially bias?).
(2) Many of the tests which require race indication (SAT, ACT) are graded by machines, eliminating any potential race bias.
While I understand that employers or test graders might employ some of their own bias after becoming aware of an individuals race , the solution is not to simply ban the question. That solves nothing; employers find out eventually.
The true enemy here is systemic racism, but it's solution is complex and probably best left to another debate.
Schools record test scores based on race & gender.
Some Quick Evidence Sources: Katherine Reynolds Article, Fast Facts, Resume Genius, Employers respond to racial names, UP-ED , Media Matters For America, Field Experience on labor market discrimination, 7 ways companies discriminate.. ,
Job-Liability, lost pregnancy discrimination case , Age discrimination case, Age discrimination in work force ,Iowa woman fired for being too attractive by dentist.
How and why we should solve these problems: We need to make it illegal for companies to put labels for people who take job resumes to prevent hiring discrimination and do the same for school test to not cause people to judge people's intelligence from knowledge of race but percentage of all students of any background mixed together at the school.
I am a Senior Student who has witnessed many accounts of job discrimination and volunteered to take the name job experiment where you select a variety of different races form multiple companies with different racial backgrounds, ages and genders.
What I discovered is that white men or Asian/Caucasian women were more likely to be hired with thousands of job offers over any other race who mostly received none even with high education. In end men won but what if you couldn't judge an employee by gender but hire due to skills for job not age or nationality/ethnicity?
Well the answer is simple we'd all live in a better world. Sure racism comes up in work force but with this method discrimination is less likely yo happen as often.
Through affirmative action, which is defined as an "action favouring those who tend to suffer from discrimination" or simply "positive discrimination," the United States has made significant progress in closing the gap in many forms of inequality. In an essay written by Scott Plous of Wesleyan University, he states that important gains have been made been made through affirmative action, "help[ing] 5 million minority members and 6 million white and minority women move up in the workforce [in 1995]." (1) These numbers are likely much larger now. He further proves his claim by mentioning that large companies such as AT&T, Sears, and IBM have experienced increased minority employment after adopting affirmative action policies. This kind of progress, however, is not possible without employers or school officials having full access to a candidate profile. In fact, preventing employers and school officials utilizing affirmative action has proven to have the opposite effect. In 1998, the state of California imposed a statewide ban on affirmative action, preventing school officials to take into account race when accepting students. The outcome of this ban has led to a sharp decrease in student diversity at many universities. One year after the ban, enrollment of African American students and Hispanic students at U.C Berkeley was cut by 50% (8% ->4%) and 36%(14% ->9%) respectively(2) and as can be seen by U.C.B"s student body data, these numbers have still not recovered (3). Undoubtedly, affirmative action, made possible by knowing a candidate"s race, has allowed employers and school officials to make progress towards ensuring equality in many forms, gradually addressing your concern of "white men or Asian/Caucasian women [being] more likely to be hired." Therefore, it would be unwise and even detrimental to ban using knowledge of race.
In a utopian society, I agree with what you stated; employers should not be able to judge an employee by gender or nationality/ethnicity. Instead, employees and students should be hired based on their ability to perform the job and intelligence. However, we must face the bitter reality that we do not live in such a society and perhaps never will. Therefore, we must seek a solution to this problem that is pragmatic. Each potential employee or student must be judged holistically, encompassing even race, gender, sexual identity. Through a holistic approach to employment and admissions, we allow for affirmative action, which I believe will gradually close the gap of inequality.
"Americans who fared worst during the economic crisis, suggesting a shortage of skilled workers might be sending employers deeper into the labor pool...)
The unemployment rate for those at least 25 years old without a high school diploma fell to 7.4% in October"a sharp drop from 7.9% in September and a year earlier, the Labor Department reported."
The rate of drop outs in our colleges are 2.5 around the United States due to unemployment which is caused by labeling in our online job applications.
"Two years ago, I noticed that Monster.com had added a "diversity questionnaire" to the site. This gives an applicant the opportunity to identify their sex and race to potential employers. Monster.com guarantees that this "option" will not jeopardize your chances of gaining employment. You must answer this questionnaire in order to apply to a posted position"it cannot be skipped. At times, I would mark off that I was a Black female, but then I thought, this might be hurting my chances of getting employed, so I started selecting the "decline to identify" option instead. That still had no effect on my getting a job. So I decided to try an experiment: I created a fake job applicant and called her Bianca White."
A woman tries the race test by pretending to be different race on online job applications.
"First, I created an email account and resume for Bianca. I kept the same employment history and educational background on her resume that was listed on my own. But I removed my home phone number, kept my listed cell phone number, and changed my cell phone greeting to say, "You have reached Bianca White. Please leave a message." Then I created an online Monster.com account, listed Bianca as a White woman on the diversity questionnaire, and activated the account.
That very same day, I received a phone call. The next day, my phone line and Bianca"s email address, were packed with potential employers calling for an interview. I was stunned. More shocking was that some employers, mostly Caucasian-sounding women, were calling Bianca more than once, desperate to get an interview with her. All along, my real Monster.com account was open and active; but, despite having the same background as Bianca, I received no phone calls. Two jobs actually did email me and Bianca at the same time. But they were commission only sales positions. Potential positions offering a competitive salary and benefits all went to Bianca.
At the end of my little experiment, (which lasted a week), Bianca White had received nine phone calls"I received none. Bianca had received a total of seven emails, while I"d only received two, which again happen to have been the same emails Bianca received. Let me also point out that one of the emails that contacted Bianca for a job wanted her to relocate to a different state, all expenses paid, should she be willing to make that commitment. In the end, a total of twenty-four employers looked at Bianca"s resume while only ten looked at mines."
"The more America continues to hold back great candidates based on race, the more our economy is going to stay in a rut. We all need each other to prosper, flourish, and to move ahead."
Imagine if this women had no sex or race on her job application.
If this were true nearly 70% of Americans would be employed but due to labeling on job applications were stuck deep in the pit of sexist and racist misfortune we could easily avoid by simply making this barbaric practice illegal.
Not only does this vile label discriminate against women and ethnicity's but also names.
According to News.com.au, Agnok Lueth had applied for over 1,000 jobs that matched his qualifications, but hadn't gotten a bite. Then he decided to send out six resumes as "Daniel McLean." Presto! He got five callbacks. None of these led to an interview, and if he had been hired, Lueth probably would have had trouble drawing a paycheck under a fake name. Nonetheless, his experiment does appear to reveal some racism inherent in Australian hiring policies.
"In the video, a man named Jose Zamora tells the story of how he applied to 50 to 100 jobs every day for several months " without receiving a single response.
One day, he decided to drop the 's' from his resume and go by the name of Joe. A week later, "Joe" was flooded with emails from prospective employers who wanted to meet with him"
"Cindy Mohamed uses her real name on her resume these days, but that hasn't always been the case.
The Australian-born Muslim woman recalls changing her surname "post 9/11" after becoming frustrated with numerous rejections for jobs she felt suitably qualified for.
The first time she used the surname 'Makram', a name borrowed from her father's side of the family, she won a job interview from a company that had already rejected her application as Cindy Mohamed.
She was so upset by the realisation her name was affecting her job-hunting that she "actually told them off".
"I thought, 'From now on I'm sending my resume with Cindy Makram.'"
Ms Mohamed's story is not unusual. According to an Australian study, job seekers with foreign-sounding names could be missing out on job interviews because of "habitual workplace discrimination".
Researchers from the Australian National University submitted 4000 fictional job applications for entry-level jobs, and found those with "non-Anglo" sounding names had to submit more resumes in order to gain an interview."
If putting your name on a online job application was illegal then people wouldn't be left unemployed due to name discrimination.
A: "This brings me to higher realization that if individuals are attend any state college then we must remove the labels we have formed for many years in our society. These labels such as putting race on online job applications not only prevent a better work force but can deny the rights of any race minority or not to have the ability to even attend college."
B: Affirmative action, made possible by these labels, has the opposite effect. Therefore encouraging companies and schools to adopt affirmative action policies would have a much more profound impact on combating discrimination than banning use of these labels.
A: "The rate of drop outs in our colleges are 2.5 around the United States due to unemployment which is caused by labeling in our online job applications."
A: "Imagine if this women had no sex or race on her job application."
B: What if the job required a specific sex? If it were illegal to discriminate based on sex, certain industries would crumble. It would be very hard for me to enjoy a nice meal at hooters if I was being served by a 40 year old man shaking his manboobs in my face. What about the modelling industry? Can I sue Victoria's secret for not hiring me to advertise a bra's because I am a man? What about the entertainment industry?
Although for a job that does not require a certain sex, I agree that discrimination based on gender not be allowed.
A:If this were true nearly 70% of Americans would be employed but due to labeling on job applications were stuck deep in the pit of sexist and racist misfortune we could easily avoid by simply making this barbaric practice illegal.
And to reiterate, simply removing the requirement of specifying race/sex on a piece of paper solves nothing. People would remain stuck in a deep pit of sexist and racist misfortune because employers and schools are still capable of discrimination whether or not you ask for sex/race on a piece of paper.
A: "According to News.com.au, Agnok Lueth had applied for over 1,000 jobs that matched his qualifications, but hadn't gotten a bite. Then he decided to send out six resumes as "Daniel McLean." Presto! He got five callbacks. None of these led to an interview, and if he had been hired, Lueth probably would have had trouble drawing a paycheck under a fake name. Nonetheless, his experiment does appear to reveal some racism inherent in Australian hiring policies.
If putting your name on a online job application was illegal then people wouldn't be left unemployed due to name discrimination."
B: It's easy to think that outlawing mandatory name identification would solve Mr. Lueths problem.But it won't. All it does is creates logistical problems for the employer.
I agree with you that discrimination based on name/age/sex/race exists in the workplace, but the problem here is not specifying these traits on a piece of paper; people are still able to discriminate and probably will continue to do so. Instead we should allow employers and schools to know the name/race/sex of the people they hire or accept, but require companies and schools to adopt affirmative action policies (within reason) and publish their hiring/enrollment statistics. By doing so, we can ensure greater diversity in the workforce and, using the published data, we can ensure equality in the workforce by prosecuting companies and schools which have proven to discriminate based on such traits.
TrinitHall.o forfeited this round.
TBJ forfeited this round.
TrinitHall.o forfeited this round.
TBJ forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.