From The “No Shit Sherlock” Files
You don’t say?
A new study shows that employers are less likely to call back applicants with Black [sic]-sounding names than those with white-sounding ones.
Researchers at the University of California, Berkeley, and the University of Chicago recently filed 83,000 fake job applications for 11,000 entry-level positions at multiple Fortune 500 companies with names like Brad, Greg, Darnell, Lamar, Amanda, Kristen, Ebony and Latoya.
The study, “A Discrimination Report Card,” found that the white-sounding applicant names were favored up to 24 percent more than the likely Black [sic] applicants.
https://archive.fo/WNeXi
Gee Wally, why would a hiring manager pass over a “black-sounding name” when blacks bring lower IQs, violent tempers, a well deserved reputation for lacking industriousness and an absence of impulse control to the workplace and if you try to fire one you are likely to get sued and be subject to protests? Better to just avoid hiring them in the first place.
I have been in hiring roles before and have interviewed and hired a few blacks. One in particular was a very good employee but she was also in a role where not a ton was asked of her. She was the exception, not the rule. Why would you hire someone that is far more likely to be a problem employee?
I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that we have only the word of these researchers that the research actually took place and that the results were what they claim. Given the widespread to the point of nearly universal plagiarism among woke types on campus, as well as documented examples of data being skewed to give the desired results, do you even believe they did the research? It isn’t like the author of this piece, Cheyanne M. Daniels, is going to do the legwork to verify their claims….
Her entire job is sniffing out “racial discrimination”. If a study had been conducted that showed no difference, would she report on it? Of course not, nor would the university publish it. Like the old saying about journalism “If it bleeds, it leads”, people like Cheyanne Daniels are only interested in stories that hit the hot button topics, in her case “the intersection of race and politics”. Finding ways that blacks have been done wrong by Whitey, real or imagined, keeps her paychecks coming and there are plenty of throw-away studies like this one that she can cite, dress up with a few quotes and empty platitudes and submit for a “story”.
What no one would dare to ask is what seems to be an obvious question. Assuming this study is accurate, is it possible that applicants with black-sounding names are not called back as often because experience has shown that black employees perform worse than White employees? Just this week we saw the Feds going after the gas station chain with the delightful name Sheetz (sheeeiiitttzz!) because their criminal background check as part of the employment process unduly impacts black people.
Wait one second, are you saying that blacks are far more likely than Whites to have a disqualifying criminal background? Weird that hiring managers don’t bother calling people for interviews with black-sounding names. It must be RACISM!