When that foot-in-the-door belongs to someone you know...

I'm listening to an NPR show, "Talk of the Nation". The guest, Nancy Ditomaso, is discussing a piece she wrote for the New York Times about how people find desirable jobs through social connections and networking, or suffer from lack of access to these resources. 

http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/05/how-social-networks-drive-black-unemployment/?hp

Ms. Ditomaso is speaking primarily in the context of black unemployment. Even with education and other earned indicators of merit, access to social networks matters a lot when it comes to getting a job, at least in the case of desirable, competitive ones. This is another area where inequality of opportunity persists, it would seem.

Networking is important for everyone, of course. This is part of why the "brand name" of an Ivy League is considered so valuable--it affords its "owners" access to exclusive networks and opportunities, in some cases anyway. 

According to Ditomaso, most people will say, "the connection just got me in the door, and then it was up to me to prove myself". This is very true, and I've said those words myself*. The problem lies in the failure to acknowledge that there were probably many others who could have "proven themselves" in that position, were they given the chance. The social network plays an important role in securing one's initial access to the hiring process, and also eases the way through to being hired. The foot in the door might not be your own, but instead belong to someone you know.

This being the Internet, it's important to mention that this isn't a dialectical argument. Merit still matters, and no one is claiming otherwise. But I think just about everyone knows, whether they'll admit it or not, that merit is only part of the story.

It seems there is an explanation to be found here for the resentment whites, lower-skilled in particular, tend to harbor toward affirmative action. Basically, it has tended to stymie the relatively more-privileged access to coveted "good jobs" which they enjoyed in the past by short-circuiting the advantages afforded by social connections, i.e. the "old boys network". Ironically, then, affirmative action can actually promote the very meritocratic conditions that its detractors claim it threatens. Big shocker, I know. I wonder if anyone has ever used the term "meritocratic relativism" to describe this particular attitude?

There's an interesting discussion to be had about the phenomenon of threatened privilege (racial, gender, sexual orientation, religious...) and the tendency of its sufferers to turn to reactionary political ideologies. Concentrated resentment can be quite flammable, both societally and sometimes literally. It can also be a powerful fuel for the boosting of political fortunes. This isn't anything particularly new, but for some reason this topic doesn't get much air time in the mass media. Not even on Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, gosh darn it!

If you can get a hold of it, give the Times piece a read. Interesting stuff.

*It's funny...the way I got this job I have now, is Mom heard about it through a colleague of hers that worked here, and was looking to hire someone who knew certain languages. So I fit the bill, but the personal connection definitely played a role in both alerting me to the opening, and in easing the way once I applied.