Labor market discrimination

The privilege or disadvantage of individuals is not determined by a single social identity. The sexual division of labor affects women’s and men’s labor supply, the industries and occupations they enter, their earnings and progress. However, being a racial/ethnic or sexual minority (along with class and age) also influences job opportunities. Evidence shows that minority women’s experiences are unique and jointly determined by their gender and minority status, although the gender effect appears to precede that of minority.

Arguments for increasing gender diversity on corporate boards of directors by gender quotas range from ensuring equal opportunity to improving firm performance. The introduction of gender quotas in a number of countries, mainly in Europe, has increased female representation on boards. Current research does not unambiguously justify gender quotas on grounds of economic efficiency. In many countries, the number of women in top executive positions is limited, and it is not clear from the evidence that quotas lead to a larger pool of female top executives, who, in turn, are the main pipeline for boards of directors. Thus, other supplementary policies may be necessary if politicians want to increase the number of women in senior management positions.

Over the past decades, academics worldwide have conducted experiments with fictitious job applications to measure discrimination in hiring. This discrimination leads to underutilization of labor market potential and higher unemployment rates for individuals from vulnerable groups. Collectively, the insights from the published research suggest that three groups face more discrimination than ethnic minorities: people with disabilities, less physically attractive people, and older people. The discrimination found in Western economies generally persists across countries and is stable over time, although some variation exists.

The use of anonymous job applications (or blind recruitment) to combat hiring discrimination is gaining attention and interest. Results from field experiments and pilot projects in European countries (France, Germany, the Netherlands, Finland and Sweden are considered here), Canada, and Australia shed light on their potential to reduce some of the discriminatory barriers to hiring for minority and other disadvantaged groups. But although this approach can achieve its primary aims, there are also important cautions to consider.

Acceptance of one’s gender identity and congruence between one’s gender identity and outward appearance are associated with less adverse mental health symptoms, and greater life and job satisfaction. However, trans people are subject to human rights violations, hate crimes, and experience higher unemployment and poverty than the general population. Trans people often feel that they are citizens who are not allowed to be themselves and practice their authentic identity. Many biased treatments of trans people could be attenuated if legal protections and inclusive workplace practices were in place.

While many firms have recognized the importance of recruiting and hiring diverse job applicants, they should also pay attention to the challenges newly hired diverse candidates may face after entering the company. It is possible that they are being assessed by unequal or unequitable standards compared to their colleagues, and they may not have sufficient access to opportunities and resources that would benefit them. These disparities could affect the career trajectory, performance, satisfaction, and retention of minority employees. Potential solutions include randomizing task assignments and creating inclusive networking and support opportunities.