Poverty and Social Exclusion in the UK: Vol. 1 by Dermott Esther Main Gill

Author:Dermott, Esther, Main, Gill [Dermott, Esther, Main, Gill]
Language: eng
Format: epub
ISBN: 9781447332176
Barnesnoble:
Goodreads: 32201629
Publisher: Policy Press
Published: 2017-11-29T00:00:00+00:00

Discrimination and the ‘ethnic penalty’

Explaining the ethnic variations identified in these analyses is beyond the scope of this chapter. However, previous research suggests that these inequalities cannot be explained by variations in individual or group capacity; with pay penalties persisting even after adjusting for variations in level of educational qualifications, occupational group, age, health, marital and familial status, and place of birth/generation (Heath and Cheung, 2006; Longhi and Platt, 2008). Indeed, those groups identified here as most likely to experience these difficulties are extremely heterogeneous in terms of these characteristics: Black Caribbean people, for example, have a much longer history of residency in the UK than other groups experiencing similar rates of poverty.

A more convincing explanation proposed for this ‘ethnic penalty’ has been the historical and persistent prejudice experienced by (white and non-white) ethnic minority populations in the UK, and elsewhere (Heath and Smith, 2003; Platt, 2005; Borjas, 2006; Longhi and Platt, 2008). The PSE-UK 2012 survey identified significant ethnic differences in rates of reported interpersonal racism: with 16% of Polish, 13% of Black Caribbean and Black African, 10% of Pakistani, white Irish and Indian people reporting being harassed, abused or made to feel uncomfortable in the 12 months prior to the PSE-UK 2012 interview. There are also significant ethnic differences in people’s sense of being treated less favourably by people in a position of authority: 12% of Black Caribbean, 11% of Black African, 9% of Polish and 7% of Pakistani and Indian described exposure to institutional racism in the previous 12 months. It is difficult to apply these figures directly to explain ethnic differences in poverty and social exclusion, however, due to the complex and multifaceted nature of the processes by which such experiences lead to socio-economic disadvantage. For example, among migrants, it is argued that a two-pronged ‘immigration penalty’ operates to depress their occupational achievement relative to their skills and education (Heath and Ridge, 1983; Platt, 2005). Because qualifications, skills and experience gained outside of the UK are considered by employers to be less relevant in the UK context, this discourages them from offering appropriate positions to migrant applicants.

This (and other) evidence speaks to an ongoing issue affecting the lives of people with a range of ethnic minority backgrounds, including their present and past socio-economic status (as individuals and groups) and the extent to which this may be overcome by investments in education and so on. Indeed, the positivity regarding the economic implications of increasing numbers of people with ethnic minority backgrounds attending higher education (Modood, 2004; Heath and Cheung, 2006; Platt, 2007) has been offset by evidence of persistent (and dramatically increasing) greater over-qualification in employment among, particularly, Black African, Black Caribbean, Chinese and Pakistani/Bangladeshi male and female graduates, compared with the white UK-born population (Rafferty, 2012). The extent to which qualifications – even those awarded in the UK – produces occupational improvements also shows variations by ethnicity which it is difficult to explain away based on individual or group characteristics.

But the operation and implications of discrimination are often difficult to identify (and measure).

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.