Differences in Black and White Perceptions regarding Addressing Racial Inequality in the Workplace

HTML  XML Download Download as PDF (Size: 259KB)  PP. 1-11  
DOI: 10.4236/oalib.1104199    854 Downloads   3,475 Views  Citations
Author(s)

ABSTRACT

This research effort explores the difference in black and white perceptions concerning racial inequality in the contemporary American workplace. Age, educational attainment, personal income, political views, gender, and work status were used to delineate interactive effects on inequality perceptions. Conflict Theory was used for framing the social inequality process. Historically, conflict theorists have viewed relationships between groups as being characterized by competition or conflict resulting in social inequality. The data used to examine perceptions of racial inequality were obtained from the 2016 General Social Survey. This research effort found that blacks and whites demonstrated very different perceptions regarding workplace racial inequality. Generally, blacks believed there are significant barriers to equal treatment while whites felt that no remedies are necessary for ensuring minority participation in the workplace. The findings showed black and white respondents had very different perceptions for addressing workplace inequality. Black individuals tended to view preferential hiring and promotion as a way to successfully reduce racial inequality. Whites, on the other hand, illustrated the opposite viewpoint by overwhelmingly not supporting preferential treatment as an organizational tool for dealing with workplace racial inequality.

Share and Cite:

Lewis, R. (2017) Differences in Black and White Perceptions regarding Addressing Racial Inequality in the Workplace. Open Access Library Journal, 4, 1-11. doi: 10.4236/oalib.1104199.
Journals Menu
Follow SCIRP
Contact us
+1 323-425-8868
customer@scirp.org
WhatsApp +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
Click here to send a message to me 1655362766
Paper Publishing WeChat

Copyright © 2024 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.