[Student Name]

SOC 140 Summer 2021

How Racial/ Ethnic-Based Discrimination Impacts Career Tracks and Mobility in the Labor

Market? A Perspective on Stratification

Introduction

Persistent racial inequality in the labor market has changed focus on the possibility of

ethnic-based discrimination as a hindrance to the career mobility of individuals. Understanding

that discrimination is still persistent is critical in our understanding of society. Unlike in the pre-

civil rights era where discrimination and racial prejudice are easily distinguishable and

observable, the mobility of the minorities in the labor market is easier to impose. However, with

today’s discrimination less identifiable, it contributes to several problems in the measurement of

the extent of discrimination. Moreover, with the subtlety and covertness of contemporary forms

of discrimination in the labor market, it has become difficult to identify a more effective

structural mechanism that could have to solve the issue. This paper intends to understand the

impact of race and ethnicity in the career tracks and mobility of workers in the labor market, how

race or ethnicity could hinder them obtain higher-level positions, and how do these impacts

affect our perception of Whites and Hispanics. The studies of stratification beliefs should

extend beyond the usual Whites-Black emphasis, carrying the interconnection of the impacts of

the race-based stratification into the everyday experience of Hispanics, the understanding of their

identities and of their racial attitudes cultivating more understanding as to why inequality still

exists despite the current programs instituting dissolution of inequality in the workplace.
Theory

It has been established since that society is dominated by individuals who would

ruthlessly try hard to protect their interests and gain leverage over the others most especially

when it comes to resources. It has been perceived by many that class position in society is

earned instead of expressing it. That is why we see many people tending to judge individuals

based on their accomplishments, wealth, or power rather than giving them the chance to express

themselves and be merited by their skills and capabilities. The United States had been proud of

claiming that it is a classless society, that every individual in the society is morality worthy

equal terms regardless of the person’s economic status or wealth. This has also been what other

nations believed the United States is and, in the words of Alexis de Tocqueville, Americans

were “more equal in fortune and intelligence… than were any other country” (Tocqueville,

2000). These words suggest depth aspirations of even the earlier Americans for a society that

grants everyone equality and pioneers towards a classless society.

However, this perception just remains as it is - a perception. Today, we see many

Americans’ stretching themselves in the class ladder and be more important than other people.

While class in itself is not just about money, its relation to wealth creates a gap that can be seen

from every angle of life: family, health, security, education, and the labor market. Inequalities

exist in each of these dimensions clustering together so tightly that it makes social stratification

visible and enduring across generations.

Two impacts of these inequalities and class stratification include opportunity hoarding

and exploitation. In the words of Charles Tilly in his book “How to Hoard Opportunities”,

opportunity hoarding is the act of controlling resources by a specific race or group, in a way that
they would exclude others from access to resources or the benefits that they believe are accruing

to them. Tilly (1998) asserts that some groups organize themselves to hoard opportunities,

hindering others from access to certain resources including occupation opportunities.

According to Douglas S. Massey in the “Categorically Unequal the American

Stratification System”’, exploitation occurs when an individual from a social group seize a

resource that is produced by the members of another special group preventing them from using

and realizing the full worth and value of their effort in the production of that resource.

Opportunity hoarding on the other hand occurs when one social group prohibits or restrict the

other social group to the access of scarce resources, either through monopolizing the control of

that resource or to deny that group the control to those resources resulting in the necessity of the

out-group to pay for the access of that resource (p. 6). While Tilly had used the term

“opportunity hoarding’’ distinctively from other forms of social manipulation and control, like

exploitation, in the past years, scholars now associate opportunity hoarding as a means for

exploitation. Opportunity hoarding coupled with exploitation creates destructive discrepancies

in the rewards and opportunities that different groups could achieve and acquire leading to highly

unstable social networks and discriminations.

Method

The labor market is among those areas that are highly stratified based on race and

ethnicity. In this context, we would be able to understand how opportunity hoarding and

exploitation works in the labor market resulting in discrimination and less opportunity for other

minority groups to level themselves up into the corporate ladder. Looking into the opportunity
difference in promotion between Whites and Hispanics, we would be able to see the impact of

this stratification in the career path and mobility of these individuals.

While it would have been more engaging to have primary resources, the time and the

circumstances hinder the possibility of taking interviews and doing fieldwork. Instead, it had

been more appropriate and practical to have the research a consolidation of the different review

studies and peer-reviewed journals. The studies and journals were obtained from approved

databases and sites like the Brookings, the Census Bureau, the UC Davis Center for Poverty

Research, and many others. With the utilization of these news reports, op-ed columns, and peer-

reviewed sociological work, it would be identified that opportunity hoarding and exploitation

exist in the labor market resulting in the widening of the social gap, misunderstanding of racial

identities, and the persistence of inequality in the labor market.

Findings Part 1

The consolidated research findings, all pinpoints to the powerful mechanisms described

by Massey in the book “ Categorically Unequal the American Stratification System”, which are

the distribution of the people in the society to social categories and the institutionalization of the

practices for the resources to be allocated unequally to the social categories formed (p.5). For

example, in the research of Vargas (2016), those who were ascribed to Mexicans are more likely

to experience discrimination compared to those being ascribed to Whites (p. 498). This reflects

the first mechanism which is the creation of social categories. The ascribing of an individual to a

specific race, categorizes that individual, allowing him or her to experience less opportunity.

This parallels the findings of Lacayo (2017) who argues that the racial ideology that is externally

ascribed perpetuates the concept of inferiority among Latinos, creating them low perception of
themselves and making them think they less deserve a better position in society. Moreover,

Lacayo (2017, p. 566) asserts that this sociological construction creates wrong images about

Latinos, indicating that they were among those groups that are difficult o assimilate into the

society (p. 579). These findings echo the first mechanism that is described by Massey, which is

the creation of social categories and ascribing these racial groups with traits that makes them

inferior and easily subjugate.

The second mechanism is the institutionalization of social practices that would further

the categorization of the groups and allow the controlling group to gain more advantages and

rewards over the allocated resources. In the study of Gong, Xu, & Takeuchi (2016), the

differences in the perception of ethnic groups and their traits, cultivates discriminatory practices

that damage the networks of the ethnic minorities. These minorities experience considerable

disparities in the labor market, not only in the opportunity of obtaining a job but also in the

opportunity of landing a better corporate position. This reflects the findings of Sue and Lambert

(2021) in which they argue that racial attitudes are products of discrimination and dominant

ideologies resulting in a racialized belief system that associates the color of the skin to negative

stereotyping (p. 162). This leads to the belief by the ethnic minorities that despite programs

about diversity and inclusion, the people of color do not experience any rewards in their struggle

to be accepted through merit and qualifications in jobs and even in educational institutions.

The Hispanic experience of discrimination in the workplace suggests the application of

both exploitation and opportunity hoarding. For example, Vargas et. Al (2016) argues that

being socially assigned as Mexican “carries a heavy burden and speaks to the systemic

discrimination that exists for Latina/os, particularly for Mexicans” (p. 508). With this,

Mexicans are deprived of the opportunity to integrate into society and attain better employment
status. Despite the prevalence of Mexican effort for the American economy, with their labor

outputs into the American society, they “lag educationally and economically” (p. 508). Pager

and Western (2012) assert the same argumentation, indicating that because of the hoarding of

opportunities and exploitation of minorities, antidiscrimination law does not anymore offer them

equal protection. Moreover, Pager and Western suggest that due to the subtlety of the forms of

discrimination that exist in modern times, forms of exploitations were easily perpetrated and

enforced in the labor market and even into society.

Findings Part 2

The effects of the creation of social categories and the institutionalization of social

practices that would implement the categorization of social groups create disparities in job

finding, wages, and corporate opportunity for Hispanics. Judd Kessler and Corrine Low in the

article “ It will take a lot more than diversity training to end racial bias in hiring’’ argues that

despite companies reaffirming their commitment to racial justice and equity, the hiring practices

that companies apply and observe today still shows bias. Kessler and Low argue that candidates

from the minority group would need a greater GPA to get the same rating from a while male of

a lesser GPA. Kessler and Low also assert that the perpetration of the social mechanism creates

an unconscious bias that exists in many corporations nowadays, despite the efforts for diversity

and inclusionary measures. Moreover, Kessler and Low suggest that in cases where the

corporations who hire would not have time to go over the requirements of the applicants, they

would just base their decisions on what was called “cognitive shortcuts” which results in the

creation of wrong mental perception about an individual just because he or she belongs to a

certain race. Cary Funk and Kim Parker in the report from the Pew Research Center indicated
that Hispanics are underrepresented in science, technology, engineering, and math occupations

due to the restrictions put to their access to quality education, discrimination in the recruitment

state of finding a job, and the lack of encouragement being made when these individuals are

younger and are pursuing jobs (Funk & Parker, 2018).

The way how Hispanics perceived at work could be attributed to Massey’s

argumentation about how stereotypical judgments were made. He indicated that human beings

evaluate other human beings through two basic psychological dimensions namely warmth and

competence. Warm accordingly refers to how approachable and likable a person is and

competence refers to the ability of an individual to enact tasks or work with efficacy (Massey,

2007). With these dimensions, those who work in the corporate ladders and hire new employees

would tend to use their cognitive placement of groups that would result in stereotyping and then

discrimination. These were being experienced by the Hispanics. This experience of the Hispanics

in the labor market suggests how some groups have more opportunities than others (Collins,

2000).

Conclusion

The creation of social categories leads to many repercussions and in the case of Latinos.

It is not just that they were perceived racially but the discrimination in the workplace perpetuates

the notion of the inferiority of their race. The institutionalization of the social prejudice towards

Hispanics leads to the formation of racial ideologies that restricts and limits their opportunity for

a higher corporate position and even having a stable job. Hispanics were ascribed deficient

traits, which they were able to pass down to the younger generation. The series of exploitation
and opportunity hoarding made Latino felt they could no longer assimilate effectively into

society.

While the labor market creates competition among social groups, through the categorical

inequality that exists, certain groups fail to gain leverage over scarce resources. Hispanics'

experience of discrimination in the workplace does not only impact their current generation but

also these groups' future children. Moreover. The institutionalization of social practices that

hinders them to improve their economic standing continues to hinder them to access the outputs

they have long worked for. Lacayo emphasizes how these actions of discrimination would persist

and become more sustaining especially if no action is implemented from the governing groups.

While there is the stipulation of the need to assimilate and acculturate Latinos to the

American culture, these actions have dire consequences, leading Hispanics to misunderstood

their own unique identities and culture. Moreover, the presence of control and manipulation of

the elite groups in the society over the minorities like the Latinos creates the distinct notion of a

racially idealized society – one in which suggests that equity and justice among races could

never be attained.
 References

Collins, P. H. (2000). Black Feminist Thought: Knowledge, Consciousness, and Empowerment.

New York: Routledge.

Funk, C., & Parker, K. (2018, January 9). Women and Men in STEM Often at Odds Over

Workplace Equity. Retrieved from Pew Research Center:

https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2018/01/09/blacks-in-stem-jobs-are-

especially-concerned-about-diversity-and-discrimination-in-the-workplace/

Gong, F., Xu, J., & Takeuchi, D. T. (2016). Racial and Ethnic Differences in Perceptions of

Everyday Discrimination. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 34(4), 506-521. Retrieved

from https://doi.org/10.1177/2332649216681587

Kessler, J. B., & Low, C. (2020, July 24). Op-Ed: It will take a lot more than diversity training

to end racial bias in hiring. Retrieved from Los Angeles Times:

https://www.latimes.com/opinion/story/2020-07-24/employment-hiring-bias-racism-

resumes

Lacayo, C. O. (2017). Perpetual Inferiority: Whites'Racial Ideology toward Latinos. Sociology of

Race and Ethnicity, 3(4), 566-579. doi:10.1177/2332649217698165

Massey, D. S. (2007). Categorically Unequal The American Stratification System. New York:

Russell Sage Foundation.

Pager, D., & Western, B. (2012). Identifying Discrimination at Work: The Use of Field

Experiments. Journal of Social Issues, 68(2), 221-237. Retrieved from

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/pager/files/identifying_discrimination_pager_western.pd

f?m=1462807104

Rivera, L. (2015). Pedigree: How Elite Students Get Elite. Princeton University Press.
Sue, C. A., & Lambert, N. (2021). Understanding Inequality: Mexican Americans' Stratification

Beliefs. Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 7(2), 160 - 174.

Tocqueville, A. d. (2000). Democracy in America. (H. Mansfield, & D. Winthrop, Eds.)

Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Vargas, E. D., Winston, N. C., Garcia, J. A., & Sanchez, G. R. (2016). Latina/o or Mexicana/o?

The Relationship between Socially Assigned Race and Experiences with Discrimination.

Sociology of Race and Ethnicity, 2(4), 498-515. doi:10.1177/2332649215623789