A few weeks ago I posted about some of the reasons female minority lawyers are dissatisfied with the law firm environment. Well yesterday, I was watching Saturday Night Live's annual commercial show and this sketch, while funny hit on some salient issues.
A couple of weeks ago 60 minutes ran a story on the impact of younger workers in the workplace. The piece noted that younger workers have different expectations concerning their careers than older workers. According to the story, gone are the days of working your way up through the ranks. Younger workers are demanding changes in the terms of their employment and are less likely to remain loyal to an employer who does not grant them their requests.
While the story did accurately depict a change in attitudes among younger workers, it was off-base with regard to the causes. The piece pointed to baby-boomer parenting tactics that encouraged self worth over hard work and results driven praise as the cause of changes in the attitudes of younger workers . What the piece did not address was what role changes in employer behavior played in the change. Over the past two decades, younger workers have watched as their parents were laid off or had their salaries cut at the whim of their employers. This corporate behavior sent a powerful message to the children of the workers that there is no such thing as job security in today's workplace.
Simply put, the change in behavior is probably due at least in part to a recognition of the fact that the employer is going to make choices based on the bottom line. If the employer can and will make decisions without regard to the impact on individual employees,isn't it rational for the employee to demand all it can and vote with their feet if the company does not oblige?
On Tuesday, NPR reported on a Pew Research Center/NPR poll that indicates that the end may in fact, be near. The study, that looked at perceptions of issues of race among Blacks, Whites and Hispanics found that some 37% of the Blacks who responded indicated that Blacks could no longer be seen as one "race." We have talked before about how there is no such thing as physical race, but this poll is important because it talked about whether there is still a social race that predominates among people who share similar phenotypic traits.
We may indeed be at a tipping point in which values are more associated with class status than with traditional notions of race. This is important because the NPR story that analyzed the survey indicated that white and black values are in fact, becoming more similar as the gulf between lower-class blacks and middle to upper-class blacks grows. The gulf may be widening as people of higher socio-economic classes begin to try to shed the stereotypical images that seem to predominate the media's airwaves. Or perhaps the Gulf is a result of the simple economic truth that education and access to money have a profound effect on an individual's values.
For those of us interested in issues of diversity it means that perhaps it is time to re-examine the assumptions we make about race. Instead, maybe t is time for us all to take a long hard look at the class issues that are at the heart of the problems we all face.
I ran across this Law.com article this morning that reports a study of job satisfaction among mid-level associates. The article explained that a study of mid-level associates at law firms indicated that minority women were less satisfied with their firms than white men and men of color and were less likely to see a future with their current firms.
Frankly, as a firm dropout, this study did not surprise me at all. Earlier this year the ABA's Commission on Women in the Profession published its own study that came to largely the same conclusions. From my perspective, the problems stem from partners' and coworkers' inability to see people as the individuals they are, rather than stereotype based on physical characteristics. For a woman of color, this inability can result in a double set of stereotypes that are hard to live down.
It is normal to notice the differences among us as long as we are sure we are noticing real differences and not presumptions based on misinformation and outmoded prejudices. If firms want to increase the feeling of inclusion among their associates, they have to understand that diversity is about nuance and balance and actions speak louder than words. It is simply not enough to publish policy statements about valuing diversity and recruit at minority job fairs. Firms have to think about what they will do with the candidates once they become employees. That means changing the firm's culture if necessary and confronting partners who refuse to get with the program. If your firm is having a hard time retaining double minority employees, perhaps the firm needs to take a look at whether there are institutional barriers to success that linger rather than writing it off as just another bad hire.
While I was on vacation, I saw that Genarlow Wilson, a young athlete from the Atlanta area in prison for having oral sex with a younger girl was released from prison by the Georgia Supreme Court. The Wilson case drew national attention because it arose in the aftermath of the Marcus Dixon Case. Dixon, like Wilson was a talented athlete who was imprisoned for having sex with a younger girl. The Georgia law at the time required a mandatory sentence when the age difference between consenting participants was more than two years younger that resulted in injury. Dixon's conviction was overturned by the Georgia Supreme Court shortly before Wilson's case occurred.
The case came to my attention when I was an intern in the Georgia Governor's office as the Executive Counsel's intern. I worked for Georgia Supreme Court Justice Harold Melton who at the time was the Executive Counsel to the Governor. At the time, the case was just beginning to get publicity because video of the incident between Wilson, his friends and the underage girl had leaked to the media. The case was beginning to snowball and I had to give a report to the Executive Counsel explaining how Wilson's case differed from Dixon's. Wilson, like Dixon, was charged with aggravated child molestation and faced a mandatory sentence. What made the Wilson case legally interesting was that although the Supreme Court ruled in Dixon's case that the legislature's intent was not to subject those convicted of consensual sex with a younger person to felony molestation charges, the precedent did not extend to cases where the conduct involved non-procreative sex.
Both cases drew national attention because of the perceived injustice facing two young males who had done nothing more than have sex with arguably consenting young women. There was a lot of talk about their promising futures lost to the harsh realities of being a convicted felon sex offender. However what seems to be missing is the discourse on why society allows young male athletes a pass when they take part in denigrating young women. In Wilson's case particularly his behavior was deplorable. He not only took part in encouraging a young girl to perform a sexual act on him and his friends, they also videotaped the episode. Despite this, many people rushed to his defense and demanded his release. Maybe the punishment was harsh, but what about the damage he did to the young girl he took advantage of? What about her future?
I have not posted for a while because my husband Omar and I have been vacationing on Maui. Well it was not exactly a vacation, my husband was competing in the Xterra Off-Road Triathlon World Championship race. (The picture to the right shows us atop Haleakala just before sunset a couple of days after the race.) We had a great time, but we did notice something interesting related to diversity while we were there. As far as we could tell, there were no other African-Americans competing. Actually, we are sort of getting used to it. My husband was a collegiate swimmer at Auburn University and he says that there were probably only four or five other black men competing in division one at the time he was swimming. He is also usually one of the few African-Americans out mountain biking out on the trails at Oak Mountain our local state park.
As we traveled to his races throughout the summer, I always knew there were not many, if any, other blacks competing but we never really took time to think about why until we were on the plane ride home and we started talking to the person sitting next to us. He was traveling with a friend who was also an Xterra competitor and we sort of struck up a conversation. When he told us that it struck him as odd that there were no other African-Americans out there competing, we all began to wonder out loud.
So why is it?
One issue could be access to financial resources. Both mountain biking and swimming are expensive sports. Omar has been swimming since he was a child, in fact he swam in the same club team as Michael Phelps. He tells me that this type of training requires a significant time and financial investment. Mountain biking and road cycling are also very expensive sports where bikes cost in the thousands and shoes and other equipment are also very expensive, so perhaps money is an inhibitor.
Another, closely linked consideration could be return on investment. Few, if any, triathletes can make a living at the sport that they love. Even if you can get sponsors, the money that can be earned pales in comparison to what can be earned in revenue generating sports like basketball or football. So perhaps there is little incentive for parents to get their children involved in these kinds of sports.
We never came to any definitive conclusions, but you are welcome to share your thoughts about why there are very few blacks in the sport by commenting on this post. You can also keep track of Omar's progress as he trains for next season at his website.
Continue reading "Why Aren't More Blacks Competing in Triathlons?" »
I stumbled across this article from the Times of London in which quotes James Watson, the scientist who discovered the double helix formation of DNA as saying that blacks are not as intelligent as people of other races. His comments were made when discussing his opinion for the prospects for change in Africa. He is quoted as saying that things were gloomy in the region because
"all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really.”
Watson went on to say that: "His hope is that everyone is equal, but he counters that “people who have to deal with black employees find this not true”. He says that you should not discriminate on the basis of colour, because “there are many people of colour who are very talented, but don’t promote them when they haven’t succeeded at the lower level”. He writes that “there is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically."
This is not the first time that Watson has made insensitive remarks. In the past, he has been raised the ire of women's groups for his comments about female scientists. It seems that Watson would counter that many of his comments have a basis in science in scientific research. One has to wonder if these statements were made in an effort to help sell his new book. If it isn't, this may just be an example of how seemingly intelligent people can be shockingly ignorant.
When a liberal watchdog group posted a transcript of Bill O'Reilly's racially insensitive remarks about his shock at finding out that Sylvia's Restaurant in Harlem, NY was just like any other restaurant, news shows began to question whether this "compliment" was racist. In response, O'Reilly says that the remarks were taken out of context. In fact, he posted the entire hour's comments on their website. O'reilly's show Listen for yourself. During the broadcast it appeared that the comments were made as a lead in to an interview with Juan Williams, however the problematic lead in was apparently taped after the interview.
Okay, so let's take him at his word, that the comments were meant to lift up blacks in the eyes of his sheltered listeners. Although some would argue that O'Reilly knew exactly what he was saying, let's also assume that the comments were his honest impressions. Does that mean that they are not indicative of a problematic mindset? To be sure, we are not talking about a true "Imus moment". It was actually a "Biden Moment." There were no overtly racist comments. What the comments seem to reveal is a very narrow minded perception of Black people. Did he really believe that Black entrepreneurs would not have a well run business? Was he really surprised to find that the patrons were not speaking profanely? Does he not know any black people?
The debate about whether the statements were racist or not is indicative of the cultural divide that exists within the U.S. That divide exists because as a nation we refuse to confront racial issues head on. Maybe if we talked candidly about race we could narrow that gap. But in order to do that maybe we all need to be ready to confront our own long-held stereotypical notions about people of other races.
The United States is a nation filled with diversity. Since the early settlers came to continent people of different "racial" and ethnic backgrounds have shared this country. Yet despite over 400 years of experience dealing with people of diverse backgrounds, it seems we all still struggle when it comes to speaking openly about our differences. Often when the conversations arise one participant or another will advance the notion that we should not see color. While this idea is well intentioned, ignoring the differences among us does more harm than good.
Color-blindness is misguided because it minimizes the value of diversity. Now when I speak about color-blindness I am not talking about the physical differences. I am speaking of the cultural differences that have evolved because of the perception of physical differences. It is not important that individuals look different. What is important to recognize is the diversity that has developed among people. The problem with the notion of color-blindness is that it presumes that in order for people to coexist they must be the same. It is impossible and undesirable for people of different cultural backgrounds to be the same and that should not be the goal.
It may however, be uncomfortable at first for people to embrace the differences among us. But in order to make progress, we must begin the process. The reason we must recognize and embrace diversity is intuitive. Imagine a painting with only one color. Imagine a garden with only of flower. Imagine dinner with only meat. All of those things are one dimensional. What would make each of these examples better is the introduction of variation. We embrace variation when it comes to art or gardening and food because it makes the experience richer. The same holds true for cultural diversity. The differences among us make our combined experiences richer and often more productive.
Although I am an advocate of diversity, I also believe it should be approached thoughtfully. It is not enough to place people of different cultures together in a room and ask them to hold hands. For companies considering diversity initiatives aimed at consumers and employees it is not enough to make a statement about a commitment to diversity. I once worked for a firm that decided to recognize Black History Month. The well-intentioned head of the firm sent out an e-mail announcing that we would recognize the month and directed each office to organize an event commemorating the month and report back. I happened to be the only black person in my office, so my manager read the e-mail, walked into my office and asked what I wanted our office to do. While the manager may have been well intentioned, the interaction made me extremely uncomfortable. The interaction was uncomfortable because instead of embracing diversity it felt as though the firm was going through the motions of some sort of corporate reparations plan. What they didn't understand was that retaining me had nothing to do with what the firm did for Black History Month. What mattered was that they made an effort all year long to include me in the firm's culture and to respect and value how my background added value to the organization.
As America's workplaces becomes increasingly diverse, people of diverse backgrounds find themselves interacting more frequently. With that frequent interaction, curiosity about cultural differences is inevitable. It would seem that if we know more about each other's cultural norms we might be able to relate to each other more effectively. But too often good intentions go terribly wrong and what was intended to be cultural exploration can lead to huge problems. While I make no claims to speak for all minorities in the workplace, I will suggest a few tips to minimize the potential for misunderstanding.
Excelling in the workplace is about fitting in. Some minorities may not feel comfortable talking about issues of race and ethnicity because it highlights an aspect about them that is different. Further, the person you ask may be uncomfortable speaking for an entire race of people or simply resent being burdened with satisfying your curiosity.
Asking these types of questions to subordinates can be dangerous because it could be used against you. If you later make a decision with respect to that employee that he or she perceives to be unfair, you may find that the question is included as evidence of racial insensitivity in an EEOC Charge.
Asking this type of question of the wrong way could stymie your career whether you know it or not. First, your superiors may question your judgment. Second, if for some reason you are unable to ask the question in a culturally sensitive way, you may offend a people who have your future in your hands.
No matter how curious you may be, there are somethings that are better left unasked. Ask yourself if this is something you really need to know for business reasons. If it isn't business related, it may be better to ask a non-work friend.
Think about is how you want to convey the questions before you speak. Do not mimic, mock or alter your speech or mannerisms in an effort to identify with the co-worker. If you cannot do this, you should tread lightly.
