 |
1/23/05
FINANCES The economic boom is over and so are the financial gains of black and Latino workers, according to a report by United for a Fair Economy, a nonprofit economic research and development organization in Boston. The group's findings are based on data from the Census Bureau, the Federal Reserve Board, and research compiled by Brandeis University professor Thomas Shapiro. In 2000, unemployment among African- Americans dropped to 7.1 percent as the economy, prodded by the growth of high technology and the service sector, grew. By January 2002, the jobless rate for African-Americans was up by more than 10 percent in the wake of corporate cutbacks and a nationwide economic downturn. Since then, the jobless rate for black workers has hovered between 9.9 percent and 12 percent. In contrast, the jobless rate for Latinos dropped to 5.7 percent in 2000, down from 8.8 percent in the late 1980s. By January 2004, however, unemployment among this group had risen to 7.3 percent. From 1996 to 2000, the median incomes of the nation's minority groups rose steadily. For example, Asian Americans experienced the greatest increase. Their overall income rose to 122 percent of white workers' in 2000. By 2003, however, it had dropped to 116 percent. The income of Latino workers rose to 73 percent of what white workers made in 2000, but had fallen to 60 percent by 2003. African-Americans, by contrast, saw their incomes rise to 65 percent of their white counterparts in 2000. By 2003, their income had dropped to 62 percent of their white colleagues in response to widespread cuts and the economic malaise that gripped the country. The report, which tracks inheritance, found that the country's white workers were far more likely than nonwhites to have parents who are in a position to leave them assets, making it easier for them to launch careers, start families, and buy homes. Gifts or inheritances received by black individuals or families was, on average, $2,511 in 1992, according to the Fed. That figure rose to $9,439 in 1998. It dropped to $2,431 in 2001, however. Latinos received $1,727 in gifts from family members in 1992, a figure that increased to $2,647 in 1998. In 2001, Latinos received an average in gifts of $396. Both groups lagged whites. In 2001, for example, the average gift to a white individual or family was $21,259, down from $24,430 in 1992. Even so, more minorities have become homeowners due to record low interest rates and first-time homebuyer programs. In 1994, for example, just over 40 percent of African Americans and Latinos owned their own homes, according to Census data. Today, approximately 48 percent of African Americans and about 46 percent of Latinos are homeowners.
THE LAW In a move that could impact legal, accounting, and other professional service firms around the country, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission last week charged one of the country's biggest law firm partnerships with promoting a discriminatory retirement practice. The complaint alleges that Sidley Austin Brown & Wood of Chicago relied on an age-based retirement policy that forced 32 partners to resign against their will in 1999. The partners were among some 1,500 scattered about the country. The case is being watched closely by legal specialists and business leaders who maintain that, until now, professional partnerships at accounting, law, medical, and financial service firms were exempt from equal employment opportunity laws because their members were considered part owners and not employees. But as professional service firms have grown, the role of their partners has changed, too, said Joyce Olner, an attorney at Shaw Pittman in Washington, D.C. Reportedly, problems arose at Sidley Brown because of the enforcement of a longstanding mandatory retirement program requiring that older individuals leave. The EEOC is alleging that Sidley Brown told nearly three dozen attorneys 40 or older that their titles were being changed from partner to special counsel or counsel. The firm also slashed their salaries by 10 percent. Sidley Brown contends it did not discriminate. The EEOC, however, argues the partners who were forced out were partners only in name because they did not make management decisions. Instead, the federal agency said, they were employees and, as such, guaranteed protection from age discrimination.
WORKPLACE A tiny device inside a company computer tracks keystrokes, another monitors a worker's Internet activity, and a third can determine the exact whereabouts of drivers who deliver goods and services. At other companies, workers' desks, written mail, and telephone calls are sometimes scrutinized. High-tech monitoring may be an employers' right in the modern-day workplace, but some employees call it spying, says the Society for Human Resource Management, an group of 190,000 human resource professionals around the world. The society reports that while human resource professionals say they understand why employers institute tracking devices to monitor workers' whereabouts and actions, most employees do not. The report is based on a poll of 336 human resource professionals and 520 employees. Of those polled, only 23 percent of the employees said companies have the right to search a worker's desk, office, or mail. By contrast, 49 percent of the human resource professionals felt companies should exercise the right to search desks, offices, or mail. In addition, 76 percent of the human resource professionals said firms have the right to monitor e-mail and cellphones. Fifty-two percent of the employees agreed. The report was released last week by the society and CareerJournal.com. ''Many companies have instituted policies regarding employee use of the Internet at work,'' said Tony Lee, editor-in-chief of CareerJournal.com. ''It's reasonable for organizations to monitor employment Internet usage, but certain activities should remain private.'' Most workplace specialists agree firms should not read employees' mail, listen to their telephone calls, or search desks and offices without cause. But Susan R. Meisinger, president and chief executive of the Society for Human Resource Management, believes monitoring is essential because many firms have private or proprietary information on their computer systems they would not want competitors to access. Diane E. Lewis can be reached at .
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|
E-Mail This Article
