Page 162 - Discrimination at Work The Psychological and Organizational Bases

6. RACE COMPOSITION
131
The Law and Its Enforcement
In theory, since the passage of Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, which
prohibited, among others, sex and race discrimination in establishments
with at least 15 workers, it should have been costly to engage in such
discrimination. However, because of legal ambiguities about what con­
stitutes compliance and spotty enforcement (e.g., Donohue & Siegelman,
1991; Edelman, 1992; Leonard, 1989), organizations can choose to "take
substantive action or merely comply symbolically" (Bielby, 2000, p. 125;
see also, Edelman & Petterson, 1999). Organizations subjected to stronger
enforcement pressures (e.g., federal contractors) are more open to minori­
ties than those who are not (e.g., Brown, 1982; Holzer, 1998; Leonard, 1984).
One can think of equal employment opportunity (EEO) legislation and
administrative orders (e.g., Executive Order 11246) as having generated
what Konrad and Linnehan (1995) called "formalized human resource
management (HRM) structures" within organizations. These structures
refer to formal rules, procedures, programs, and positions that influence
personnel decisions. As noted above, these formalized structures merely
may be symbolic (e.g., Edelman, 1992), intended to do little to improve the
employment status of protected groups. A more favorable view is that these
structures are ineffective because they are intended to be "identity-blind"
(Konrad & Linnehan, 1995) or to function under "a veil of ignorance as to
group identification" (Glazer, 1988, p. 32) thereby supposedly eliminating
discrimination based on group membership. However, Konrad and Lin­
nehan reasoned that the impact of identity-blind structures is limited, for
they do not adequately control biases against members of protected groups.
Alternatively, they argue that "identity-conscious" or "race-conscious"
(e.g., Glasser, 1988) structures, which include demographic group identity
in HRM decision-making processes, are more effective. This is so because
personnel decisions are monitored more closely and, thus, the numbers,
experiences, and outcomes of protected group members are attended to
more closely, with special efforts made to employ and promote them.
Empirically, Konrad and Linnehan (1995) observed, among the organi­
zations they studied, that identity-conscious but not identity-blind HRM
structures were associated positively with indicators of the employment
status of people of color. Therefore, it seems vigorous law enforcement
matters, likely by promoting HRM policies, practices, and procedures that
are race sensitive. Weak law enforcement, on the other hand, likely pro­
motes ineffective or simply symbolic gestures on the part of organizations
subjected to them. These conclusions were drawn based upon research ad­
dressing the enforcement of federal law. However, state and local laws and
the enforcement of them may matter too; only future research will tell.