http://raprehab.com/being-black-in-corporate-america/

Being Black in Corporate America:
From a Socioeconomic Standpoint (Part I)

To be Black in corporate America usually means to operate within the narrative of partial or total assimilation into a workplace or social hierarchy that does not recognize minorities as being on equal footing in comparison to Whites. There are indeed differences between racial groups in a country’s economic infrastructure refusing to acknowledge a system that has, and continues to, provide preferential treatment to one group of people over another. When viewing this from a socioeconomic standpoint, it evidently shows a financial partiality based on ethnic and gender classifications because race and socioeconomic status are presumably linked. To say that economic inequality is still a heavily racialized phenomenon, even a generation after the end of the Civil Rights era, would be an understatement. Yet both major parties continue to discuss inequality in largely color-blind terms, only hinting at the role played by race (Resnikoff, 2014). The color-blind or race neutral perspective holds that in an environment where institutional racism and discrimination have been replaced by equal opportunity, one’s qualifications, not one’s color or ethnicity, should be the mechanism by which upward mobility is achieved (Gallagher, 2003, p. 101). This, along with concepts such as “social upward mobility” and the “American Dream” are rooted in Democratic ideological beliefs that education and hard work alone are the keys to unlock the doors of socioeconomic prosperity. Such a perspective only hinders the understanding that the majority of America’s wealth is concentrated or focused within the top 1% of income earners and they are primarily White.

To begin, multiple studies show that White men earn more than all other ethnicities and genders in America. The Federal Reserve performed a study based on consumer finances and concluded that the wealth of white households was 13 times the median wealth of black households in 2013, compared with eight times the wealth in 2010 (2013). It also suggests an increase in White household income and significant decreases within the minority households while confirming that wealth gaps between races based on the findings are at or about the highest levels observed since compiling statistical data on this subject matter. The variable of poverty comes into play and has been so racialized that an uninformed person will assume that a discussion about poverty and welfare recipients automatically refers to minorities. Yet, according to the 2013 Census, approximately 19 million Whites are poor and over half of all welfare recipients (social and corporate) are White (New York Times, 2012). On the other hand, Blacks and Hispanics report an inexplicably higher rate of poverty with around 25% of the total population living under the poverty line and subjected to impoverished conditions, while being more likely to have their welfare benefits affected, in comparison to a dismal 9% rate of poverty for Whites. Additionally, the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics presents the same kind of dismal picture for minorities:

Hispanics…. account for about 15 percent of all jobs, but a whopping 36 percent of all high school dropouts. They make up about half of all farm workers and laborers, 44 percent of grounds maintenance workers, and 43 percent of maids and house cleaners. Blacks, who make up just 11 percent of the workforce, account for more than a third of home health aides and about 25 percent of both security guards and bus drivers—rather low paying jobs. Whites, on the other hand, make up more than 80 percent of the country’s workers. But they account for nearly all farm managers and ranchers (96 percent) construction managers (92 percent), carpenters (91 percent), and CEOs (90 percent). The story is true for Asians, as well…… Asian-Americans account for 5 percent of the workforce, but also a whopping 60 percent of personal appearance workers, (e.g. hairdressers, nail salon workers), 29 percent of software developers, and nearly one in five physicians and surgeons.

Such data presents strong implications of Whites being beneficiaries of White privilege, or any socioeconomic privilege, luxury, and consideration Caucasians receive simply for being white compared to the same for non-whites. Due to a narrative of Americans operating within a framework of a supposed post-racial society, it is regularly displayed that Whiteness is the standard to which all others should adhere to if they wish to be perceived as “normal” and any underachievement is due to individual faults more so than being systematically underprivileged.

Other socioeconomic differentiations and discriminations bring to light an even deeper divide that only widens with time. For example, education certainly plays into the income inequality gap and Ashton (2014) further elaborates:

Men, regardless of race or ethnicity, earn more than women of any race when education level is held constant, with one exception – Asian women. Asian women with bachelor’s and advanced degrees are the only women who make more than one group of men–black men, who earn the least in comparison to their male counterparts at every level of education.

The interesting scope is that lack of education itself is deemed as a fundamental barrier for access to higher pay and increased socioeconomic status amongst minorities in poverty. Conversely, having an education has the most benefit for men, especially white men (Ashton, 2014). Black and Hispanic children have lower rates of graduating high school and receiving degrees from college than Whites, thus limiting their access to positions that potentially offer a higher socioeconomic affluence or status. It is known that socioeconomic segregation exists within access to basic living conditions, housing, health care, education, and employment. Poverty severely incapacitates access to lucrative employment, consequently crippling opportunities and forces them to survive on meager wages. Additionally, Blacks are subjected to job market discrimination, or a practice where employers will screen potential employees based on ethnic sounding names. In other words, a name that sounds “Black” will yield fewer callbacks for job interviews than a name that sounds more “White”. Practices similar to the aforementioned further prove the fact that corporate America is not embracing of Blacks. Moreover, minority representation is extremely low in the higher ranking corporate positions and when one reaches the ranks of the upper executives, it is very likely people will attribute it to affirmative action filling a federal quota rather than qualification to perform the tasks of the position.

There are various socioeconomic factors playing into the high unemployment rates among Blacks and lack of true diversity in this country’s workforce. This does not fully explain the mechanisms or social structures which limit minorities from achieving a supposed upward mobility in much larger numbers but perhaps, provides some insight into the discussion of what it means to be Black in corporate America under the lens of socioeconomic interpretation.