We’d do better to create a third legal category of workers, who would be subject to certain regulations, and whose employers would be responsible for some costs (like, say, reimbursement of expenses and workers’ compensation) but not others (like Social Security and Medicare taxes). Other countries, including Germany, Canada, and France, have rewritten their laws to expand the number of worker categories. There’s no reason we can’t do the same, and give gig-economy workers a better balance of flexibility and security.
.. And, as Sundararajan says, “It makes no sense to have a well-developed safety net for one category of employment and virtually none for other kinds of productive work.” Obamacare was a step in the right direction, and Senator Mark Warner, of Virginia, has suggested that we could use a similar system for benefits like workers’ comp and unemployment insurance. Work is changing. The protection we offer workers should change as well.
Education to Monetize Skills and Connect with Employers
.. Technology is redefining work and commerce, and if we’re smart it can also redefine education for employment and advancement so everyone can monetize, or improve, any skill and connect with any employer in need of it.
.. We need to be making much better use of the federal government’s labor market data and that of websites like Monster.com, HireArt.com and LinkedIn, and even consider creating skill equivalents of the Obamacare health exchanges.
.. If we used all our technology resources, said Aneesh Chopra, former chief technology officer of the United States, we could actually give people “personalized recommendations for every step of your life — at every step of your life.” Adds Auguste: “We can use technology to do more than automate tasks. We can use it to accelerate learning, optimize talent, and guide people into better jobs and careers.”
Recruitment, Resumes, Interviews: How the Hiring Process Favors Elites
But if you look at how these firms’ recruiting processes actually work in practice now, the chances of getting into one of these firms from what’s called a non-targeted school is extremely low. And this is because these firms starting around the 1980s shifted from a hiring system in which people were hired in a one-off fashion through informal networks to really really focusing on on-campus recruitment where firms hire directly out of the graduating classes and oftentimes earlier from elite universities.
.. But in terms of inequality, what ends up happening is if you’re not at one of those schools, the only way to really get into one these firms is to have a personal connection to someone who already works there.
.. But what’s wrong with it is that I don’t think people understand the extent to which elite university admissions are biased against individuals from lower-income backgrounds. We have this narrative that they really are the most rigorous admissions processes that cherry pick the best and the brightest irrespective of social background—and that’s actually pretty false. Some of the things that matter most in getting into an elite college—whether it’s your SAT score, your extra-curricular participation, the actual high school you attended—are so strongly influenced by social class that you’re not necessarily getting the best and the brightest. You’re getting good and bright people who come from the most privileged backgrounds.
.. What kind of social skills are elite companies looking for?
Rivera: I think a lot of what they’re looking for when they’re looking for social skills—or “polish”—is conformity to this particular way of interacting that’s very common in upper-middle-class, upper-class social circles. They’re really really looking for, in the interview setting, not only someone who presents well—in terms of someone who’s dressed professionally, who makes eye contact, who seems confident (because those tend to be social skills that are valued even if you go across class), but they’re looking for conformity to these very specific ideals, this delicate balance between being a good listener, and following instructions and what the interview has to say, but also subtlety taking charge.
.. Rivera: Yeah, interviewers really look for “personal passion.” The idea of passion was so central to a convincing story, things like obligations were kind of a buzzkill. They wanted something that had more of a personal touch, and it was fueled by inner drive instead of any type of external demand—whether it’s a family member you have to take care of, or you have to pay your tuition bills, and so forth. That was not as valued.
.. we lack sophisticated language for distinguishing and talking about class versus race. What ended up happening in the interview is that some, not all, but some interviewers assumed that minority candidates who were racial minorities came from disadvantaged backgrounds.
.. Rivera: In terms of schools … schools are crucial because they really do shape the candidate pool into these jobs. I think that adopting less class-biased admissions criteria at elite universities would be really really important. I think giving less weight to extracurricular activities and the specific high school someone attended could be an important step. I also think, and other researchers show, that if you rely more on class ranks than SAT scores you’ll probably help level things out a little bit. The SAT is great at many things, but it’s also a huge engine of inequality.
.. I think another thing that could be done is blinding evaluators, both in resume screens and in interviews, to candidates’ extracurricular activities. That’s because extra-curricular activities are a huge source of class inequality whether it’s in university admissions or in interviews.