Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

The unintended consequences of the '91 civil rights legislation

Posted by   + Show Post

The paper can be downloaded to read here

Here is an overview. 


Mickey Kaus, in linking to this post below (thanks, Mickey!), asks:

If a Hispanic who has performed as poorly and prominently as Patti Solis Doyle can’t be fired without her employer getting grief from Hispanic leaders, isn’t that a pretty big disincentive to hiring a Hispanic in the first place? Message: Stick to white males — if they screw up, you can sack them and nobody will whine.

Actually, that disincentive and that “message” have long been recognized as one of the costs of civil rights enforcement.

A classic example is the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which made it easier for disappointed job seekers to file “disparate impact” claims based on statistical evidence and increased the money-damage awards to plaintiffs.

In this excellent 2003 article, Stuart Taylor Jr. discusses a study by a Stanford economist and a Northwestern management professor, among other evidence, indicating that the 1991 law made “employers in traditionally white-male industries marginally less likely to hire minorities and women.”

How could the risk of high damage awards for discriminating against minorities and women make employers more hesitant to hire them? Because employers know that far more lawsuits are brought, and far greater damages are awarded, for claims of discrimination in firing than in hiring. So the risk of being sued for turning down a minority or female applicant is dwarfed by the risk of being sued later for firing the same applicant after giving him or her a try.

“The increases in potential damage awards,” write Oyer and Schaefer, “coupled with a decades-long trend toward firing-based, and away from hiring-based, employment-discrimination litigation, means the main impact of the act was to increase the costs to employers of dismissing protected workers…. Because [an employer] feels firing-based costs only if it decides to hire, the costs act as an implicit tax on such hiring. Firing-based protections may therefore lead employers to hire fewer protected workers, not more.”

Nor, Taylor continues, were these results unanticipated.

…. In a Stanford Law Review article half a year before Congress passed the legislation, Stanford Law School professor John J. Donohue III and co-author Peter Siegelman documented a major shift in the nature of job-discrimination lawsuits—as well as a spectacular increase in their number—since 1970: “While most cases formerly attacked discrimination in hiring, today the vast majority of all litigation suits challenge discrimination in discharge.” And although the 1964 Civil Rights Act was extremely valuable in breaking down the flagrant discrimination in hiring then practiced by many employers, the authors wrote, the “dramatic shift to firing cases has greatly increased the likelihood that Title VII will create a drag on the hiring of protected workers rather than the positive inducement it originally provided.”

Note that Taylor did not recommend (and, for what it’s worth, neither do I) that Congress eliminate damages for discriminatory firing, “[e]ven if the costs of such lawsuits to minorities and women, not to mention employers, have come to exceed their benefits….”

Racial discrimination is wrong, but that doesn’t mean we should refuse to see the costs of eliminating it. And it is always useful to be reminded that efforts to do good, especially when the power of the state is enlisted in the cause, often do both more and less than the good intended.

Minnow Slayer

by on Aug. 17, 2013 at 7:50 AM
Replies (31-40):
sweet-a-kins
by Emerald Member on Aug. 17, 2013 at 3:25 PM
Please provide sources showing Al or Jesse doing this getting involved because someone was falsely saying they were fired for their race

Quoting Carpy:

Nope.



Quoting sweet-a-kins:

A lie of course





And a tired one at that











Quoting Carpy:

Until Jackson and Sharpton step in.







Quoting sweet-a-kins:

for 12 years I hired and fired people. I never worried about firing any race or sex because they were ALWAYS backed with the correct paperword

I guess lazy people who don't handle their business properly may not like it, they actually have to abide by laws...

and OP, I am sure no white people ever claim they were fired for BS reasons...o wait they do as well! lol

I once has a white man tell me and my boss that I fired him because I was afraid he would take my job one day....and threatened to sue

Too bad so sad for him. Not only did I document all his performance reviews (with his own comments admitting to bad behavior) but I had video of his drunk work shifts I had to send him home from..

Being a good leader means you can back your decisions, period


Quoting quickbooksworm:

I have never been nervous to fire a minority for doing shit work. I even fired a pregnant woman once (for good reason).


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
parentalrights1
by on Aug. 17, 2013 at 4:24 PM
1 mom liked this
I've had a Hispanic coworker who was shitty at her job and always taking long breaks and shed claim discrimination but I know that white bosses will discriminate too. There are lots o racist white people who angry at minorities and try to find any imagined double standard to bitch about
kailu1835
by Ruby Member on Aug. 17, 2013 at 4:31 PM
Interesting thought process there.
Carpy
by Ruby Member on Aug. 17, 2013 at 5:03 PM
Right now I am in the midst of trying to move half a million fireworks from an old restaurant building that was serving as my warehouse and stuff them all over my store so we can tear it down and build a new store. I am sure you can Google.

Quoting sweet-a-kins:Please provide sources showing Al or Jesse doing this getting involved because someone was falsely saying they were fired for their race

Quoting Carpy:Nope.

Quoting sweet-a-kins:A lie of course

And a tired one at that



Quoting Carpy:Until Jackson and Sharpton step in.


Quoting sweet-a-kins:

for 12 years I hired and fired people. I never worried about firing any race or sex because they were ALWAYS backed with the correct paperword

I guess lazy people who don't handle their business properly may not like it, they actually have to abide by laws...

and OP, I am sure no white people ever claim they were fired for BS reasons...o wait they do as well! lol

I once has a white man tell me and my boss that I fired him because I was afraid he would take my job one day....and threatened to sue

Too bad so sad for him. Not only did I document all his performance reviews (with his own comments admitting to bad behavior) but I had video of his drunk work shifts I had to send him home from..

Being a good leader means you can back your decisions, period


Quoting quickbooksworm:

I have never been nervous to fire a minority for doing shit work. I even fired a pregnant woman once (for good reason).


sweet-a-kins
by Emerald Member on Aug. 17, 2013 at 6:34 PM
In other words , you can find no evidence of your assertion

You manage to post all over cafemom during your move...even posting this article

Yet you can find zero stories backing up your claim

That's what I thought


Quoting Carpy:

Right now I am in the midst of trying to move half a million fireworks from an old restaurant building that was serving as my warehouse and stuff them all over my store so we can tear it down and build a new store. I am sure you can Google.



Quoting sweet-a-kins:Please provide sources showing Al or Jesse doing this getting involved because someone was falsely saying they were fired for their race



Quoting Carpy:Nope.



Quoting sweet-a-kins:A lie of course



And a tired one at that







Quoting Carpy:Until Jackson and Sharpton step in.





Quoting sweet-a-kins:

for 12 years I hired and fired people. I never worried about firing any race or sex because they were ALWAYS backed with the correct paperword

I guess lazy people who don't handle their business properly may not like it, they actually have to abide by laws...

and OP, I am sure no white people ever claim they were fired for BS reasons...o wait they do as well! lol

I once has a white man tell me and my boss that I fired him because I was afraid he would take my job one day....and threatened to sue

Too bad so sad for him. Not only did I document all his performance reviews (with his own comments admitting to bad behavior) but I had video of his drunk work shifts I had to send him home from..

Being a good leader means you can back your decisions, period


Quoting quickbooksworm:

I have never been nervous to fire a minority for doing shit work. I even fired a pregnant woman once (for good reason).


Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Carpy
by Ruby Member on Aug. 17, 2013 at 6:54 PM

Mobile Photo

can't get any more pack than this.
Carpy
by Ruby Member on Aug. 17, 2013 at 6:54 PM

Mobile Photo

Carpy
by Ruby Member on Aug. 17, 2013 at 6:56 PM

Mobile Photo

on the above phote to the left is a very long showcase that is packed solid. I can appease your sorry ass when I get home.
Carpy
by Ruby Member on Aug. 17, 2013 at 9:06 PM


Rev. Jackson's extortion racket
by Paul Campos
Rocky Mountain News

Anyone interested in how the American civil rights movement has largely degenerated into a series of shakedown schemes that would make the Mafia blush needs to read Jesse Jackson's recent interview in the Chicago Sun-Times.

The interview itself is one of those texts that, like Shakespeare and the Bible, should be read more than once. No single reading can do justice to the picture of hypocrisy, greed, megalomania and corruption the Rev. Jackson unwittingly paints when discussing his increasingly tangled affairs. Here are some highlights:

Last year, Jackson billed the charities he controls $614,000 for "travel expenses." When asked to explain this extraordinary figure, he says that he often spends more than 200 days per year traveling on charitable business. Yet even if we make the charitable assumption that this figure doesn't include any direct padding of Jackson's self-reported $430,000 annual income, this still works out to nearly $3,000 per day.

Do the contributors to Jackson's charities (who include everyone who pays taxes) realize the reverend claims to spend the bulk of his working days traveling in a style that would embarrass the Rolling Stones?

In recent years, Jackson has spent much of his time opposing mergers in the broadcast and telecommunications industries -- mergers that require federal approval. The Sun-Times explains that Jackson "withholds his approval until the companies meet his demands for greater minority participation."

On a remarkable number of occasions, "minority participation" ends up meaning "Jesse Jackson's friends and business associates." For example, Jackson opposed the CBS-Viacom merger, but let it be known that his opposition would disappear if Viacom were to sell its UPN network to Chester Davenport or Percy Sutton, both long-time friends of his.

The Sun-Times reports "Jackson also blocked the SBC-Ameritech merger until Ameritech agreed to sell part of its cellular phone business to a minority owner, who turned out to be Davenport." "The price you pay for our support," Jackson says, "is to include us."

Of course the reverend wants people to think he means "the African-American community" when he refers to "us." A mountain of evidence suggests the pronoun should be given a somewhat more limited meaning. (In yet another example of what Jackson means by the politics of inclusion, his Citizenship Education Fund has gotten hundreds of thousands of dollars in grants from telecommunications companies whose mergers he initially opposed.)

Charity, as they say, begins at home. One of Jackson's highest-profile boycotts was of Anheuser-Busch. Three years ago, Anheuser-Busch's warm feelings for the Jackson family overflowed to the point where the corporation gave Jackson's sons a beer distributorship.

When the Sun-Times asks if there might be any connection between the boycott and the awarding of the distributorship the reverend becomes mightily offended. "If Bush is qualified to run the country, they are qualified to run a beer distributorship" he thunders, employing a typically spurious bit of illogical demagoguery. "They should not be profiled or otherwise suggestions dropped that they are less than able to do what they do. That is very insulting to me. Very insulting."

This is a truly priceless bit of racialist bluster. Notice Jackson doesn't even bother to deny that the distributorship was a payoff. Instead, he switches the topic to the racially loaded question of whether his sons were "qualified." Qualified for what -- to join their father in enjoying the fruits of the racial protection racket? There's no need to feel insulted, Reverend: Nobody doubts they were.

There is much more along these lines, including details of how Illinois' Republican Gov. George Ryan appears to have bought Jackson's political support. All this leads to a simple question: How can a man who at this point retains all the moral authority of a professional extortionist continue to hold himself out as one of America's political and spiritual leaders?

Paul Campos is a professor of law at the University of Colorado. He can be contacted at paul.campos@colorado.edu.

March 13, 2001

**And here's a link to the column in the Chicago Sun-Times that he refers to: http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/jesse08x.html

Quoting sweet-a-kins:

In other words , you can find no evidence of your assertion

You manage to post all over cafemom during your move...even posting this article

Yet you can find zero stories backing up your claim

That's what I thought


Quoting Carpy:

Right now I am in the midst of trying to move half a million fireworks from an old restaurant building that was serving as my warehouse and stuff them all over my store so we can tear it down and build a new store. I am sure you can Google.



Quoting sweet-a-kins:Please provide sources showing Al or Jesse doing this getting involved because someone was falsely saying they were fired for their race



Quoting Carpy:Nope.



Quoting sweet-a-kins:A lie of course



And a tired one at that







Quoting Carpy:Until Jackson and Sharpton step in.





Quoting sweet-a-kins:

for 12 years I hired and fired people. I never worried about firing any race or sex because they were ALWAYS backed with the correct paperword

I guess lazy people who don't handle their business properly may not like it, they actually have to abide by laws...

and OP, I am sure no white people ever claim they were fired for BS reasons...o wait they do as well! lol

I once has a white man tell me and my boss that I fired him because I was afraid he would take my job one day....and threatened to sue

Too bad so sad for him. Not only did I document all his performance reviews (with his own comments admitting to bad behavior) but I had video of his drunk work shifts I had to send him home from..

Being a good leader means you can back your decisions, period


Quoting quickbooksworm:

I have never been nervous to fire a minority for doing shit work. I even fired a pregnant woman once (for good reason).



Minnow Slayer

Carpy
by Ruby Member on Aug. 17, 2013 at 9:07 PM


Jesse Jackson extortion tactics used for decades

July 21, 2013

Jesse Jackson has used extortion by threatening companies with money by denying companies black customers. It is a stretch to believe that Jesse Jackson can deliver a boycott of black consumers at his command. However, the media circus of Jackson television carnival act defeats any advertising done by any company. So Jackson got millions “donated” to his personal charity cause. Jackson got millions from federal funding to his personal charity cause like RAINBOW PUSH COALITION and his favorite color in the rainbow is mostly green for cash.

So today, Jackson resorts to his old card trick of an ace up his sleeve. BOYCOTT Florida! The state won’t donate money to shut him up. The state won’t waste money to persuade Jackson to leave and shut up. I remember seeing Jackson as the young minister struggling to get his congregation stronger. Yes, he wore a fur coat and had a Rolls Royce when I saw him in 1975 at a swanky restaurant in Chicago as he tended to his flock. It seemed all of those present had very nice clothes and jewelry as they drank bottles of wine with expensive fancy food for dinner. None of this is to “profile” Jesse Jackson as a greedy promoter using the poor blacks for his personal gain more than helping as a minister.

I am envious that I can’t live that a life of luxury, gourmet food, fancy clothes, and luxury cars as a globe trotting minister. So hats off to Jackson that his one and only source of income continues to keep him wealthy and happy. If you think you qualify as a victim, just get in contact with Jackson and become a media star! The media doesn’t bother reporting on his extortion racket that relies on the threat by Jackson that he can summon the blacks throughout the land to walk away from buying your product or visiting your state.

Media creates Jackson as Wizard of Oz for extortion.

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)