The labor union at the New York Times published an “analysis” this week aiming to prove that ethnic minorities at the paper are getting the shaft, even as their share of staff positions has increased by close to 10 percent in the past six years.
In other words, top editors at the Times have made a concerted effort to pass over white job candidates for “people of color,” and there has nonetheless been resentment among staff. Who could have seen that coming?
“The New York Times’s performance review system has for years given significantly lower ratings to employees of color,” the union said in its report published Tuesday. It determined that “being Hispanic reduced the odds of receiving a high score by about 60 percent, and being Black cut the chances of high scores by nearly 50 percent. Asians were also less likely than white employees to get high scores.”
This comes after the paper’s leadership made a big show in 2020 — A.K.A. the year of “fiery but mostly peaceful” Black Lives Matter rioting — about how it planned “to develop an ambitious, long-term strategy for making The Times more diverse, equitable and inclusive.”
The number of non-white people on staff has steadily increased since 2016, according to the paper’s own numbers, but performance reviews for those people of color have apparently not been so hot. The union averaged the performance reviews by race from 2018 to 2021 and found that black staff members had the lowest scores on each one, except last year, when it was Latinos. (Interestingly, the union notes that in the year of Patron Saint George Floyd, not a single black person on staff received the highest performance rating possible, while white staff made up almost 100 percent of the 50 people who did.)
“Performance ratings have a direct impact on employees’ paychecks and career opportunities,” the union said. “In 2021, the company used the scores in determining the size of Guild members’ bonuses. Guild members who believed their contributions weren’t fairly rated in the review process have said they feel demoralized and alienated — a pernicious outcome as The Times attempts to recruit and retain a diverse workforce.”
Some current and former people-of-color staff writers then went to NPR to complain that they felt undervalued by Times leadership. “One former New York Times reporter who is Asian-American told NPR she wept after getting mediocre job ratings even though she had received positive verbal assessments,” the report said.
I know Charles Blow sucks, but maybe there really are some highly talented people of color on staff at the Times who aren’t properly recognized and compensated. Otherwise, what I know for sure is that this is what happens when you play the social justice suicide game.
Here are the instructions:
Step 1: Atone. (I’m so sorry for my white/male/heterosexual privilege.)
Step 2: Signal your virtue. (I really care about underserved communities and will fight for racial equity.)
Step 3: Place a premium on gender, race, and sexual identity. (We will diversify!)
Step 4: Patiently wait for the next round of grievances to make their way to your feet. (I know our work isn’t finished.)
Step 5: Repeat.
It’s a scam that the Times itself perpetuates every single day. They can reap what they sow.
Comments
Unlock commenting by joining the Federalist Community. Subscribe
Source: The Federalist
