Townsend (1989) argues in ‘The Impact of Recession’ that during much of the 1980’s, ethnic minorities were concentrated in those jobs most severely affected by the recession. These jobs were in the traditional and marginal industries concentrated in the hard-hit inner cities. In addition, Townsend suggests that the young age profile of the non-white communities in the UK meant that disproportionate numbers of ethnic minority workers were entering the labour market at a time of recession. By 1990, the unemployment rates of white people and Indian people were virtually identical, whilst the rates for Afro-Caribbeans and Pakistani/Bangladeshi were about double white unemployment rates. This pattern is broadly confirmed by the 1991 Census, but which also reveals that there are concentrated higher rates of unemployment in some local labour markets, for example 45% of South Asians in Tower Hamlets and 38% of the Afro-Caribbean labour force in Liverpool were unemployed. However, Field (1986) suggests that as the recession became more generalised in the 1990’s, there was some convergence of unemployment and a decrease in the geographical concentration of black unemployment.
The information I obtained from reviewing a wide range of literature on black unemployment, much of which attempts to explain the overrepresentation of ethnic minorities in unemployment statistics, helps emphasise a number of common themes which begin to emerge from the texts I studied, all of which make an effort to explain black unemployment. The most frequently cited explanations are:
-
The black population lacks appropriate skills and qualifications (e.g. Fevre 1984, Smith 1981).
-
The black population is younger (e.g. Townsend 1989, Bhat 1991).
-
Black workers are concentrated in particular industries like manufacturing which have been more adversely affected by industrial decline (Barber 1990, Brown 1984).
-
Discrimination increases when there is a surplus of labour (Ousley et al 2001).
-
The ‘last in, first out’ rule during redundancies (Hudson 1995).
These explanations have been frequently endorsed by a range of authors reviewed in this paper, with each one proposing their own adaptations for the explanation. It is essential that these arguments are briefly examined before endeavouring to discover where there are prominent gaps in the literature studied and where criticisms can be made.
Argument 1: The black population lack appropriate skills and qualifications.
Fevre (1984) argues in his analysis of the unemployment rates in ‘Cheap Labour and Racial Discrimination’ that there are ‘great differences between black workers and white workers with similar qualifications and reveals some striking disparities’ (Fevre, 1984: 67). Fevre uses the 1981 Labour force survey as an example of these differences and notes that 25% of unemployed west Indian men had GCSE’s, whilst the corresponding figure for white men was only 9%, and from this perspective it can be suggested that there are powerful forces at work which are discriminating against well-qualified black workers. Fevre argues that by far the most qualified but unemployed ethnic group were Asians, and unemployed Asians with degrees proportionately outnumbered similarly qualified whites by a ratio of two to one. David Smith, in a study for the PSI published in 1981, found that gaining qualifications was a protection against unemployment only for whites and he found that ‘West Indian and Asian men have much the same risk of being unemployed regardless of their qualifications, whereas among whites it is particularly the unqualified who are at risk’ (Smith, 1981: 23). However, a criticism of this explanation places emphasis on the fact that in the current climate, the black population in the UK is actually experiencing an increase in the amount of qualifications an ethnic minority leaves school with at the age of sixteen. The most recent government data points out that in 2001, the number of ethnic minority students obtaining 5 GCSE’s increased by 15% and furthermore, the number of ethnic minority students continuing their education to ‘A’ Level standard or equivalent increased by 12% in the same year. One must argue that these changes suggest that the black population of the UK is catching up with their white counterparts in terms of the number of qualifications held, and the argument that the black population’s lack of skills is holding them back in their search for employment is becoming less and less applicable.
Argument 2. The black population is younger.
Brown (1984) cites in his PSI survey paper ‘Black and White’, that the black population of the UK is younger in terms of age structure [i.e. The population has a greater percentage of young people aged 16-25 than the white population] and he notes that the unemployment rates of ethnic groups by age and sex confirms that the level of white unemployment is consistently below that of the west Indian and Asian populations for all age groups. As discussed previously, Townsend (1989) suggests that during the recessions of the 1970’s and 1980’s, the disproportionate number of young non-white workers entering the labour market for the first time, and due to the increased redundancies as a result of the recession, it was the black workers that suffered the most due to the ‘first in, last out’ rule. However, my literature review leads me to dispute this claim as figures published by the Department of Employment in 1990 show that the age effect accounts for no more than one-tenth of the difference in unemployment rates; and in the case of Asian men, allowing for the effects of age actually increases the unemployment rate. Therefore there is little weight in the argument that age structure explains higher levels of black unemployment, and only helps us understand a mere fraction of the differences between black and white unemployment rates. When discussing the effects of a younger age structure on unemployment statistics, it is vital that the fact that the UK is now experiencing third and fourth generations of ethnic minorities entering the labour market is appreciated. Whereas, in the first and second generations there was indeed a younger age structure, overtime the age gap between white and black job searchers has narrowed, and the black population has gradually developed an age structure which is increasingly similar to the white population and hence decreasing the disadvantages that age may have on the search for employment in 2002.
Argument 3: Black workers are concentrated in areas and industries which have been most affected by the recessions of the 1970’s and 1980’s.
Brown (1984) argues that because ethnic minority communities are concentrated in certain regions of the country, and the fact that the geographical effects of recessions are uneven, means that there will be a considerable increase in the levels of unemployment among blacks as they are over-represented in the industrially declining areas. However, the literature I have studied leads me to be somewhat critical of Brown’s argument due to the fact that according to the 1991 census, the majority of black people in the UK live in London and the South East – that is, in areas less affected by economic downturns. I noted that 68% of West Indians in Britain live in the South East and only Pakistanis and Bangladeshis live in significantly fewer numbers there, accounting for only 23% of their total ethnic population. Furthermore, Barber agrees with this assertion and suggests that overall, the regional distribution of black people tends to deflate their national unemployment rate rather than inflate it and ‘if Asians and West Indians had the same regional distribution as whites, then their unemployment rates would be even higher than they are already’ (Barber, 1990: 17).
The 1991 census showed that ethnic minorities were concentrated largely in manual occupations such as textiles, clothing, foundries, engineering and manufacturing, which Smith (1981) states are the declining industries. However, my literature review suggests this is an oversimplification for three reasons; Firstly, the concentration of black people in certain occupations is itself a result of racists attitudes towards the employment of black people, which prevented them from taking other work. Secondly, the spatial distribution of the ethnic minority workforce does, in itself, account for disproportionately high unemployment in certain areas and ethnic groups. Smith (1981) agrees with this and points out that most industries give rise to a rate of unemployment roughly proportionate to their share of the workforce [except in construction, miscellaneous services and textiles], and so geography does matter in terms of the location of ethnic minorities in relation to the major industries of a place and whether they are declining or not. Furthermore, my final reason is that even in the textile industry job numbers have been decreased by technological advances which have replaced the need for labour, whilst at the same time the black workforce are seen as unsuitable for new forms of work requiring mental rather than physical attributes. Fevre (1984) concludes in his paper on racism in the workplace, that the main cause of permanent job losses has been the efforts of employers to increase productivity. He states that this pursuit of increased productivity has combined with discrimination and has meant that the jobs lost in these increasingly mechanised industries are primarily those of black workers.
The issue of black workers being concentrated in the declining industries is one which has attracted a great deal of attention in academic literature, particularly during the 1980’s, as the manufacturing sector saw a period of huge decline. However, recent papers have failed to address the fact that whilst a decline in the manufacturing sector has been seen, there has been a rapid expansion of the service sector, and how this has affected levels of ethnic minority unemployment. There are two essential questions arising from this situation which need to be used as a basis for further research. Firstly, has the rise of the service sector compensated for the loss of jobs or lack of jobs in the manufacturing sector for ethnic minorities? Secondly, is ethnic minority employment becoming increasingly focussed in the service sector or are they failing to access jobs in service related employment? Through examining these questions further, and investigating the effects of the rise of the service on ethnic minority unemployment, a critical gap in the current literature on the topic can be filled and a more detailed understanding of the situation can be achieved.
Argument 4: Discrimination increases when there is a surplus of labour.
Fryer (1994) argues that a surplus of labour in the job market gives more rein to the practice of discrimination as employers have more freedom to pick and choose without having to threaten their profits and Fryer’s claim is supported by comparative figures for unemployment rates according to ethnic groups. Except on rare occasion such as 1970-74 for example, black unemployment has always been higher than white unemployment levels. However, it is relevant to mention that the Ousley et al (2002) study on the unemployment rates of ethnic minorities in Bradford, it was noted that although 2001 was a year when unemployment was very low, they found that black minority applicants for employment were treated worse than whites on 90% of occasions. The level of unemployment in 1974 when a similar study was conducted during a time when the unemployment rate was approximately 2.5% found only a 30% level of discrimination, whereas 1985 level of unemployment was 11% the level of discrimination was still at 30%. Ousley et al suggest that the level of discrimination remains the same regardless of the state of unemployment, although they do suggest that the discrimination rate might have declined from 30% to much less if unemployment had not drastically increased. The literature investigating the effects of labour surpluses on the discrimination of black workers is sparse. Little has been done to study the issue over several periods of both high and low unemployment in an effort to obtain reliable data for an argument to be based upon. Levels of discrimination need to be studied over time, not just during periods of recession and economic prosperity, and a thorough and continuous study, over several decades, needs to be conducted if the true effects of labour surplus are to be understood. Equally, the geography of discrimination resulting from labour surpluses requires further investigation, as it is unclear from the current literature whether the concentration of labour surplus in an area can definitely effect the levels of discrimination there, or indeed in other parts of the UK.
Argument 5: Black workers are disadvantaged by the ‘last in, first out’ rule.
The notion of ‘last in, first out’ was a policy advocated by trade unions as a fairer process of deciding who should be made redundant and therefore safeguarding their longest serving members. It was initially proposed as a redundancy process during the recession of the 1980’s, but as Hudson (1995) points out, it should be recognised that by 1980-85 many black workers had put in 20-30 years service, similar to their white colleagues. Therefore the effect of the ‘last in, first out’ rule should, theoretically, have had the same impact upon on all ethnic groups. However, there have been cases where this rule has only been enforced by trade unions when it has been in the interest of their fellow white workers. For example, the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) uses the case of the Coneygre Foundry in the West Midlands during the recession of the 1970’s as an example of the selective application of the rule. They state that the golden rule of ‘last in, first out’ was not applied, despite the long service of black workers. Twenty-one Indian members of the TGWU (and no whites) were made redundant, and they reacted by going on strike whilst the union argued that racial discrimination had occurred. This example is one of very few available in the literature on black unemployment and the effect of the ‘last in, first out’ process. The subject has received very little attention in terms of an in-depth analysis of the application of the rule and how it has affected ethnic minority workers in the UK is certainly required if greater weight is to be added to this explanation. A thorough study of how recent applications of the rule during the decline of the various manufacturing sectors in the UK such as textiles, steel, coal etc. will certainly help clarify the extent to which this rule effects the over-representation of ethnic minorities in unemployment data.
Conclusion
In brief, this literature review has been based on five arguments, all of which are interrelated and work in tandem in an attempt to explain the over-representation of ethnic minorities in unemployment statistics. It is clear from the criticisms, suggestions and conclusions that I have noted in my review, there is still great scope for further investigations into these explanations in an effort to quantify their applicability to the subject. The majority of studies into the issue were conducted during and after the rapid decline of the manufacturing industries in the UK in the 98’s. However, with the rise of the service sectors in the UK, and the changing patterns of employment due to this, there is clearly a need to discover whether these explanations for high ethnic minority unemployment are applicable in the current service sector dominated employment patterns ion the UK. Furthermore, it is essential that research is conducted into the changing characteristics of the ethnic minority population in the UK in terms of narrowing age structures, increased levels of qualifications etc. and ensure that these changing characteristics are borne in mind when searching for explanations for ethnic minority unemployment employment in the UK today.
References
Barber, A. Ethnic Origin and The Labour Force. Employment Gazette, 1990.
Bhat, A. Britain’s Ethnic Population. Aldershot: Gower, 1991.
Brown, C. Black and White. Policy Studies Institute. Heinemann Educational Books, 1984.
Fevre, R. Cheap Labour and Racial Discrimination. Aldershot: Gower, 1984.
Field, S. Ethnic Minorities in Britain: A Study of Trends in their Position Since 1961. London: HMSO, 1981.
Hudson, R. Divided Britain. London: Belhaven, 1995.
Ousley et al. Building Cohesive Communities. London: HMSO, 2002.
Smith, D. Unemployment and Racial Minorities. London: Policy Studies Institute, 1981.
Thomas, D. The Jobs Bias against Blacks. New Society, 1 November,1994, p .169.
Townsend, A. The Impact of Recession. London: Croom Helm, 1989.
Wrench, J. Unequal Comrades: Trade Unions, Equal Opportunities and Racism. Policy Papers in Ethnic Relations no. 5, Centre for Research in Ethnic Relations, 1986.