Headline October 02, 2016/ ''' *EMPLOYMENT* & DISCRIMINATION '''



IN THE DEVELOPING WORLD  -employment in context of discrimination is just about rampant, alarming,  undocumented, and growing by the hour.

With lax to zero laws, poverty, overpopulation,  sluggish economies, inefficient systems, no supervision, and even utter neglect, the societies spiral directionless. 

So, I turn to the developed world and struggle to find a benchmark for some cardinal steering points for the World Students Society: 

*POLICIES AIMED AT ENDING DISCRIMINATION  -against students/people with criminal records may actually have-

The unintended consequences of increasing racial discrimination,* writes Dr. Sendhil Mullainathan  - a professor of Economics at Harvard. 

That, at least, is the finding of a fascinating new study that focused on so called  ban the box regulations  -rules that prohibit initial job applications from asking prospecting employees to check a box indicating whether they have a criminal history.

It has implications for nearly all policies aimed at eliminating racial inequities.

When we try to end discrimination without addressing the underlying causes of discriminatory behaviour, our efforts may accomplish little  -and may even backfire.

Efforts to ban the box are racially charged. As Bruce Western, a Harvard Sociologist, documented in his 2009 book, ''Punishment and Inequality in America,''  many of those with criminal histories are black-

Particularly among the roughly  30 percent of black males who do not have high school diplomas.

By 2013, nearly  70 percent  of black male  *high school dropouts*  in their early 30s had served time in prison.

*Without jobs, their situation is bleak, yes they can't get past the first step of a job application if they disclose their criminal history*.

''Ban the box measures,'' are intended to address this problem: They defer this problem until job seekers have a foot in the door and can better explain their personal histories in an interview.

More than 100 states, cities and counties have enacted such policies. The White House has instituted a ban on questions about  criminal history on federal job applications, and it has encouraged private sector employers to follow suit.

Yet a working paper by Amanda Agan,   a Princeton economist, and Sonja Starr, a legal scholar at the  University of Michigan, suggests that at least in same cases, these policies may merely make life more difficult for black people without criminal histories.

In  ''Ban the box, Criminal Records, and Statistical Discrimination:  A Field Experiment,'' Mr. Agan and Ms. Starr focused on employers in New Jersey and New York City, both of which enacted ban the box rules in 2015.

The researchers sent fictitious job applications to employers before and after the regulations took effect, focusing on jobs for ''candidates with limited work experience, no postsecondary education and no specialized skills.''

Some applications were randomly assigned a criminal history and some were not; some were assigned a first name found to be more common among American blacks {like Tyree} , while others were given name that have been more common among whites {like Scott}.

Before the regulations took effect, candidates with criminal histories were far less likely to be called  back irrespective of their race.

After the regulation took effect, though, things changed. Lacking the ability to discern criminal history, employers became much less likely to back any apparently black applicant. They seemed to treat all black applicants now as if they might have a criminal past.   

These were big and disheartening effects: Banning the box extended discrimination to virtually all black applicants.

But where should we go from here?  It would be wrong to conclude from one study that these regulations are a bad idea. Research continues, and while other studies have reached similar conclusions, the verdict is not in yet.

Perhaps more important, there are sound arguments for banning the box that transcend the empirical data. We might not want to allow a practice that could be seen as a crude, extralegal form of punishment.

Ethical concerns could sway us even in the face of these findings. Yet the study illustrates a deeper economic lesson for America and the world.
Policies often go astray when we try to change behavior while leaving the motive for that behavior unchanged.

The Honour and Serving of the latest  'Operational Research on *Societies & Developments''  continues. Thank Ya all for reading and sharing forward.

With respectful dedication to the Sociologists, Economists, Students, Professors and Teachers of the World. See Ya all on !WOW!  -the World Students Society and Twitter-!E-WOW!  the Ecosystem 2011:

''' Students'  Forecast '''

Good Night and God Bless

SAM Daily Times - the Voice of the Voiceless


Post a Comment

Grace A Comment!