Today, companies are working on increasing diversity metrics. Many leaders have used the promise of hiring the best people of all races to show that diverse hiring is an ‘affirmative action scheme’ and important for the company’s growth. While merit consideration is an essential component of any reputable hiring process, merit alone is hardly the determining factor. Often, consideration for a role begins before a prospective employee submits their application. Here is why the merit-based hiring argument falls short.
Merit-based hiring does not exist
Even for the most competitive, merit-based jobs, skill is not the only factor determining whether someone will get hired. For example, it also largely depends on who knows that some job opportunities exist. Knowledge about job prospects in a few fields can be limited among low-income groups and people of marginalized backgrounds.
It also depends on who you know. If you have access to more people, the likelihood that you tell someone that you’re searching for a job and they’re able to recommend you increases. If you have access to people in higher-income ranges, the pay ranges for job opportunities are also higher.
People who like you will be more likely to hire or recommend you for work. This can provide opportunities for people, who are dedicated but do not have much background in an area. It can also allow non-conscious (or conscious) bias to limit the opportunities to some groups.
Merit does not consider systemic inequality
Hiring based on merit may seem like an undeniable way to ensure that a company is hiring the best of the best regardless of race. However, it does not mitigate systemic inequality that may inhibit certain groups from attaining the same educational resources as their peers.
Systemic inequality impacts schooling opportunities. Due to historically racist practices, like redlining, people of all races and income levels do not have the same access to educational resources. Redlining prohibited racially marginalized groups from living in certain areas. Pockets of racially marginalized groups didn’t receive adequate funds, and school systems struggled to hire enough teachers, buy enough textbooks, and provide technologies needed for a competitive learning environment. The effects of this linger on today as public schools continue to be overcrowded, underfunded, and highly saturated with Black and Latinx students.
Systemic inequality impacts who you know and the opportunities you get. However, for those who do not live in highly esteemed areas, the opportunities through their contacts can be limited. If most people in an area struggle with job stability or only work in one industry, their ability to be recommended for higher-earning job opportunities is limited.
Further, systemic inequality impacts what types of opportunities people seek. For people who struggle with immediate financial issues frequently, the prospects of going to college, studying four years, going into extensive debt, and not finding a job afterward do not seem viable. Needing to work in college may hinder their ability to study as often as their peers. Career paths that do not quickly lead to higher income may not be considered.
Merit does not consider personal hardships
Merit-based hiring does not consider that marginalized people are more likely to face personal hardships or extreme circumstances. Low-income families may be displaced more often in search of work, leading to gaps in education for their children. People from low-income backgrounds are more likely to experience adverse circumstances that high-income people cannot relate to (evictions, extreme medical debt, food insecurity). These situations have a tangible impact on the way people learn, live, process information, and the careers they have access to in the future.
By hiring based on merit, you may end up with the same kind of people– people who are not marginalized. It does not and will not enable DEI efforts. Merit often does not show that one applicant is smarter or more skilled but has had more stability, more financial resources, or less adverse circumstances than another applicant. For this reason, it is important to consider each applicant holistically based on their background.
