Do blacks get the short end of the stick or are people also worried about their own investment?
There's absolutely no reason it couldn't be both, but that doesn't mean it doesn't unjustly screw over people of color.
The sassy black person is a common archetype for a reason.
What's that reason? Any sort of citation would be nice.
I myself would never allow someone with that attitude to represent my company or business, and it's not unjust or even close to immoral to choose not to. As I mentioned earlier, there would be no leniency for a white guy who came in and presented a bad attitude with low work ethic/respect for authority. There shouldn't be for black people either. And if it's more prevalent in blacks, I'm gonna side with the whites and vice versa.
Uh, the fun thing about that article I posted earlier is they weren't even being called in for the interview.
From the article:
Now a "field experiment" by NBER Faculty Research Fellows Marianne Bertrand and Sendhil Mullainathan measures this discrimination in a novel way. In response to help-wanted ads in Chicago and Boston newspapers, they sent resumes with either African-American- or white-sounding names and then measured the number of callbacks each resume received for interviews. Thus, they experimentally manipulated perception of race via the name on the resume. Half of the applicants were assigned African-American names that are "remarkably common" in the black population, the other half white sounding names, such as Emily Walsh or Greg Baker.
To see how the credentials of job applicants affect discrimination, the authors varied the quality of the resumes they used in response to a given ad. Higher quality applicants were given a little more labor market experience on average and fewer holes in their employment history. They were also portrayed as more likely to have an email address, to have completed some certification degree, to possess foreign language skills, or to have been awarded some honors.
In total, the authors responded to more than 1,300 employment ads in the sales, administrative support, clerical, and customer services job categories, sending out nearly 5,000 resumes. The ads covered a large spectrum of job quality, from cashier work at retail establishments and clerical work in a mailroom to office and sales management positions.
The results indicate large racial differences in callback rates to a phone line with a voice mailbox attached and a message recorded by someone of the appropriate race and gender. Job applicants with white names needed to send about 10 resumes to get one callback; those with African-American names needed to send around 15 resumes to get one callback. This would suggest either employer prejudice or employer perception that race signals lower productivity.
They're rejecting them before they even got the interview. This means that they're rejecting them without any sort of evidence that they possess said attitude you seem to be so interested in. If you interview them and find out that they aren't a good fit then that's one thing. If you aren't doing the first and assuming the latter with no other evidence besides "they sound like they might be black and are therefore worse", we have a problem.
I have a suspicion that for the most part racial inequality has been eliminated. From systems, laws, and society's rules, that is. You can't eliminate it from individuals... but those dinosaurs who still feel that way will die out quickly over the next generation or two.
The problem there is that you have racially biased individuals enforcing laws.
And it's really not just a few old people doing it all or something like that. It's not really a binary, it's a spectrum that all of us fall somewhere on. (I'm admittedly guilty of this as well.) The best way to deal with it isn't to simply try to mind your business and wait it out. It requires awareness on our parts regarding our actions towards people of various groups.