PERSPECTIVE ON IMMIGRATION : A Thousand Points of Xenophobia...and a Workplace Shutout : Latino job applicants are three times more likely to receive unfavorable treatment than Anglos.

Buried within the General Accounting Office’s report on the 1986 Immigration Reform and Control Act were the results of a “hiring audit” carried out in two cities--Chicago and San Diego--with results more ominous for this country than those related to worker-eligibility procedures.

The audit reveals striking differences in the experiences of Anglo and Latino job applicants that put young Latinos at a severe disadvantage. Anglo applicants received 52% more job offers than Latino ones, who were three times more likely to receive unfavorable treatment than the Anglos. The majority of Latino applicants who received unfavorable treatment were dropped out of the hiring process just after filling out an application. Thus, the greatest barrier the Latinos faced was just getting in the door for an interview.

Even when applicants reached the same stage in the hiring process, Latinos were sometimes treated differently. In one case, the Latino was given a job as a busboy, while the Anglo was “steered” to a better job tending bar. The implications of these findings, to the extent that they reflect conditions in the whole country, are disturbing--especially at a time when many people think that gross discrimination faded out with the Vietnam War.

The visionaries who in the 1950s and 1960s set us on a course to eliminate discrimination undoubtedly anticipated that we would enter the 21st Century with reasonable prospects for equal opportunity in job and housing markets. This study’s findings imply that we are far from that vision.

Just how far we are from the reality of equal job opportunity has yet to be established. This is the first time that researchers have been able to directly observe and measure differences in hiring practices in a scientific manner. But the approach, developed by the Urban Institute and the GAO specifically to study discrimination related to employer sanctions can be used to expand our knowledge of the prevalence and character of hiring discrimination against other racial and ethnic groups.

The method used was based on an approach successfully applied to housing discrimination. Researchers trained eight pairs of similarly qualified job applicants who represented young men starting out their careers. One of each pair was Anglo and the other was of Latino origin with a very slight accent. Both were U.S. citizens. The applicant pairs were trained to answer interview questions in a similar manner and to have the same telephone demeanor. Researchers modified the applicants’ personal histories so that their work experience, education, career goals, hobbies, etc., were nearly identical; the only difference was their ethnic origin. These evenly matched pairs applied for entry-level jobs from 360 randomly selected employers. This number of jobs was more than enough for statistically valid results.

To ensure a uniform approach, meticulous procedures were followed. For example, the pairs alternated on who called the employer first; they initiated the application process at the same time, and they turned down all job offers immediately to avoid influencing their partners’ chances. They recorded all employer responses from the first contact on the telephone to the final hiring decision.

It cannot be statistically proven that the gross differences in the treatment of Latino applicants are totally the result of discrimination by employers; other factors may have contributed. Yet the Urban Institute researchers are hard-pressed to find any other plausible explanation for such differences.

Moreover, the study findings are supported by other disturbing trends in employment, poverty and demographic growth. Unemployment among Latinos today is 70% higher than for Anglos and nearly 50% higher than for all workers, according to February, 1990, figures of the Bureau of Labor

Statistics. The proportion of Latinos living in poverty increased six times faster than any other ethnic group in the 1980s.

In the next 12 years nearly 5 million young Latinos will reach employment age. The majority of them will not even have the qualifications of the applicants used in the Urban Institute/GAO study. These trends and prospects do not bode well for minorities, especially Latinos, seeking to support themselves and their families.

When the Senate finishes debating the effects of the 1986 immigration legislation, it might turn to the broader problem of employment discrimination in our society--a critical task if we are to ensure that all of our citizens have equal access to the American Dream.