Workplace Discrimination

Acriticalexaminationofresearchontherelationshipbetweenstereotypingandworkplace discrimination must meet three requirements.Thefirstrequirementisanunderstanding of the theory that guides this research. The second requirement is anunbiased review of relevant research. The third requirement is comprehension of the ways thatdifferenttypesofresearchareinformative about behavior in organizations. Landy (2008) meets none of these requirements. He misstates the consensual social scientific theory about the relation between stereotyping and discrimination, presents onlya selective portion of the relevant research, and misconstrues the basis for generalizing researchfindingstoorganizations.Asaresult, Landy misrepresents the evidence for stereotype-based workplace discrimination. For brevity, we consider only sex discrimination. Also, consistent with Landy’s emphasis, we address the consequences of stereotypes that describe women and men as opposed to stereotypes that prescribe normatively acceptable behavior for them and thus sanction behavior deviating from gender norms (see Eagly & Karau, 2002; Heilman, 2001).

OBJECTIVE There is evidence of an association between occupational stress and alcohol consumption. This study investigates the association between workplace racial discrimination and alcohol consumption in a sample of urban transit operators. METHODS During 1993-1995, after undergoing a medical exam, 1,542 transit operators completed an interview. Depending on the outcome, we used logistic or linear regression models to examine the cross-sectional relationship between discrimination experience and alcohol consumption. RESULTS Operators who reported discrimination in at least one situation, out of a possible four, were more likely to have had negative life consequences as a result of drinking (adjusted OR = 1.97; 95% CI, 1.20-3.83) and were more likely to be classified as having an alcohol disorder (OR = 1.56 [0.96-2.54]), compared to those who reported no instances of workplace discrimination. Results adjusted simultaneously for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, income, marital status, and seniority. There was no association between workplace discrimination and heavy drinking or drinks per month. CONCLUSIONS Cross-sectional data from a sample of urban transit operators indicates an association between workplace racial discrimination and some measures of alcohol consumption.

OBJECTIVES We examined the association between work discrimination and morbidity among Filipinos in the United States, independent of more-global measures of discrimination. METHODS Data were collected from the Filipino American Community Epidemiological Survey. Our analysis focused on 1652 participants who were employed at the time of data collection, and we used negative binomial regression to determine the association between work discrimination and health conditions. RESULTS The report of workplace discrimination specific to being Filipino was associated with an increased number of health conditions. This association persisted even after we controlled for everyday discrimination, a general assessment of discrimination; job concerns, a general assessment of unpleasant work circumstances; having immigrated for employment reasons; job category; income; education; gender; and other sociodemographic factors. CONCLUSIONS Racial discrimination in the workplace was positively associated with poor health among Filipino Americans after we controlled for reports of everyday discrimination and general concerns about one's job. This finding shows the importance of considering the work setting as a source of discrimination and its effect on morbidity among racial minorities.

The purpose of this paper was to determine what drives workplace discrimination against people with disabilities. These findings are then compared to available literature on attribution theory, which concerns itself with public perceptions of the controllability and stability of various impairments. The sample included 35,763 allegations of discriminations filed by people with disabilities under the employment provisions of the Americans with Disabilities Act. Group A included impairments deemed by Corrigan et al. [1988] to be uncontrollable but stable: visual impairment (representing 13% of the total allegations in this study), cancer (12%), cardiovascular disease (19%), and spinal cord injuries (5%). The controllable but unstable impairments in group B included depression (38%), schizophrenia (2%), alcohol and other drug abuse (4%), and HIV/AIDS (7%). The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had resolved all allegations in terms of merit Resolutions (a positive finding of discrimination) and Resolutions without merit. Allegations of workplace discrimination were found to center mainly on hiring, discharge, harassment, and reasonable accommodation issues. Perceived workplace discrimination (as measured by allegations filed with EEOC) does occur at higher levels in Group B, especially when serious issues involving discharge and disability harassment are involved. With the glaring exception of HIV/AIDS, however, actual discrimination (as measured by EEOC merit Resolutions) occurs at higher levels for Group A.

Objectives: Evidence for the existence of a harmful effect of chronic disease on employment status has been provided. Although this effect of chronic illness on employment has been reported to be higher among the groups with the lowest position on the labour market, the mechanisms of such inequalities are poorly understood. The present study aimed at investigating social inequalities in the chances of maintaining employment during the course of HIV infection and at examining the correlates of such inequalities. Methods: The authors used data from a national representative sample of people living with HIV in France (ANRS-EN12-VESPA survey). Retrospective information on social trajectory and disease characteristics from the time of HIV diagnosis was available. The risk of employment loss associated with indicators of disease severity and HIV-related workplace discrimination was computed over time since HIV diagnosis according to sociodemographic and occupational factors, using Cox proportional hazards models. Results: Among the 478 working-age participants diagnosed as being HIV-infected in the era of multitherapies and employed at the time of HIV diagnosis, 149 experienced employment loss. After adjusting for sociodemographic and occupational factors, disease severity and self-reported HIV-related discrimination at work were significantly associated with the risk of employment loss in a socially-differentiated manner: advancement in HIV disease was associated with an increased risk of employment loss among women (HR 4.45, 95% CI 2.10 to 9.43) but not among men; self-reported experience of HIV-related discrimination at work was associated with an increased risk of employment loss among individuals with a primary/secondary educational level (HR 8.85, 95% CI 3.68 to 21.30) but not among those more educated. Conclusions: Chronic HIV disease affects the chances of maintaining employment in a socially-differentiated manner, resulting in increasing inequalities regarding workforce participation. Disease severity and workplace HIV-related discrimination, particularly affecting the employment status of the most socioeconomically disadvantaged, may play a major role.

ABSTRACT The workplace is one of the areas in which discrimination most frequently occurs. Despite increasing workforce participation among older adults and the adverse effects of workplace discrimination on the physical and psychological wellbeing of older adults, limited attention has been given to workplace discrimination against older workers. Based on a national survey of 420 older workers age 50 and above, this study first examined the prevalence of perceived workplace discrimination. Results indicated more than 81 per cent of the older workers encountered at least one workplace discriminatory treatment within a year. Prevalence of perceived workplace discrimination differed with age, gender, education, occupation and wage. The study further tested two competing hypotheses on the level of perceived workplace discrimination and found mixed support for both. As hypothesised (based on the social barriers theory), lower education and racial/ethnic minority status were positively associated with perceived workplace discrimination. As counter-hypothesised (based on the attribution-sensitivity theory), younger ages and being male were positively associated with perceived workplace discrimination. In examining the roles of supervisor and co-worker support, the study discovered that supervisor support was negatively associated with workplace discrimination. Finally, this study revealed a non-linear relationship between wages and perceived workplace discrimination, with the mid-range wage group experiencing the highest level of workplace discrimination.

Abstract Objectives To report woman physicians’ experiences, in their own words, of discrimination based on their role as a mother. Design Qualitative analysis of physician mothers’ free-text responses to the open question: “We want to hear your story and experience. Please share” included in questions about workplace discrimination. Three analysts iteratively formulated a structured codebook, then applied codes after inter-coder reliability scores indicated high concordance. The relationships among themes and sub-themes were organized into a conceptual model illustrated by exemplary quotes. Participants Respondents to an anonymous, voluntary online survey about the health and wellbeing of physician mothers posted on a Facebook group, the Physician Moms Group, an online community of US physicians who identify as mothers. Results We analyzed 947 free-text responses. Participants provide diverse and vivid descriptions of experiences of maternal discrimination. Gendered job expectations, financial inequalities (including lower pay than equally qualified colleagues and more unpaid work), limited opportunities for advancement, lack of support during the pregnancy and postpartum period, and challenging work-life balance are some of the key themes identified. In addition, participants’ quotes show several potential structural drivers of maternal discrimination and describe the downstream consequences of maternal discrimination on the physician herself, her career, family, and the healthcare system. Conclusions These findings provide a view of maternal discrimination directly from the perspective of those who experience it. Women physicians report a range of previously uncharacterized ways in which they experience maternal discrimination. While certain aspects of these experiences are consistent with those reported by women across other professions, there are unique aspects of medical training and the medical profession that perpetuate maternal discrimination.

Sexual minorities (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals; LGBT) experience workplace discrimination that leads to decreased physical and emotional well-being, and negative job outcomes. LGBT individuals may also experience microaggressions and ostracism in the workplace. Microaggressions are brief and subtle slights or insults that can be either conscious or unconscious, which have negative consequences similar to direct “old-fashioned” forms of discrimination. Ostracism, being ignored and excluded, has similar negative outcomes. Microaggressions and ostracism are often ambiguous and difficult to substantiate legally, whereas other forms of discrimination can be observed directly. We review the literature on microaggressions and ostracism, which have recently been investigated with LGBT populations, suggesting future research directions. We suggest practices for encouraging an organizational climate of acceptance. Copyright © 2017 ASAC. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

This study investigated Mexican immigrant parents' reports of perceived workplace discrimination and their children's behavior, parents' moods, and parent-child interactions. Parents of one hundred and thirty-eight 3- to 5-year-old children were asked to complete one survey daily for 2 weeks (N = 1,592 days). On days when fathers perceived discrimination, fathers and mothers reported more externalizing child behaviors, and mothers reported fewer positive child behaviors. When mothers perceived discrimination, they reported more externalizing child behaviors; fathers reported more internalizing child behaviors. Parents reported worse mood on days with perceived discrimination. Perceived discrimination was not strongly related to parent-child interactions. For fathers, but less so for mothers, those whose psychological acculturation indicated separation had more negative relations between daily perceived workplace discrimination and child and family outcomes.

The genesis of this special issue is derived from oneaspect of our own careers. Over the past 15 years wehave collectively provided over 250 days of trainingto over 15,000 employers, rehabilitation professionals,and consumers regarding the effective implementationof the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Likeany busy consultants, we fielded scores of questionsand collected a fair amount of evaluative informationregarding the content. Again and again the same con-cern was expressed. Consumer: What does this meanfor people with my particular impairment? Employer:What does this mean for my particular industry? Both:Are there specific types of discrimination which I ammore likely to encounter? Beginning in 1992, our ef-fortsweregraduallyredirectedfromtrainingtoresearchin order to provide better answers to these worthwhileand important questions [7,8,10–13].ADA employment provisions, known as Title I, areunique as civil rights statutes go. Their character isanti-discrimination, not affirmative action. Their im-mediate purpose is to combat and minimize workplacediscrimination against Americans with disabilities. Insimple terms, ADA Title I requires that all personnelactions be unrelated to the existence or consequence ofdisability.Even 15 years after the enactment date of ADA, thelaborforceparticipationratebypeoplewithdisabilitiescontinues to languish around 30%, well under the 81%figure forthe generalpopulationof workingage adults.A variety of well documented factors contribute to thisproblem including financial disincentives to work, theuneven availability of employer-sponsored healthcare,an unstable economy, the outsourcing of jobs, the un-even performanceof our special education system, andfluctuation in the rate of unemployment. Moreover, inspite of new technologies, disability does affect abil-ity and compromises both the employability and placeability of many Americans [5,6,16,17].In 2003, a cooperative agreement was forged be-tween the Equal Employment Opportunity Commis-sion (EEOC) and Virginia Commonwealth Universitywhich resulted in the inception of the National EEOCADA Research Project (Project). Over 50 rehabili-tation researchers are engaged in an exhaustive data-miningeffortfocuseduponthe IntegratedMission Sys-tem (IMS) – a master database used by the EEOC totrack the filing, investigation, and resolution of allega-tions of workplace discrimination. Some Project in-vestigatorsare exploringtheinterfaceof disabilitywithgender, age, or ethnic status. Others are validating (ornot) extant theories of stigma, predicting EEOC inves-tigatory outcomes, or documenting discrete discrimi-natory behaviors such as disability harassment, failureto accommodate, or unlawful discharge. Like the con-tributorsto this special issue, however,most Project in-vestigatorsutilize IMS data to create disability-specificprofiles of employment discrimination. Seven suchstudiesmaybefoundinarecentspecialissueof