The Cost of "Sounding Black"

According to this study, if you "sound black," you can expect to earn about 10% less than if you sound white.

Sound racist? Well, yeah. That's probably the point of the study.

But buried in this New York Times article discussing the survey, you can expect to earn 6% less if you "sound Southern."

Is that racist? I bet fewer NYT readers object to that finding, considering they think anyone born below the Mason-Dixon line is inbred, anyway.

My first thought was, "If you can't understand someone when they speak, they probably will make less." That's a lot of what the euphemism "sounding black" is about. I don't have any polling data to back that up, mind you, but if I have to say, "Pardon?" or "Huh?" or "Could you repeat that?" more than once, my opinion of the speaker goes way down. I wouldn't be surprised if the same thing happens to potential employers.

Employers search for candidates who fit the image the company wishes to project. Typically, that means someone who comes across as well-spoken and intelligent. People who speak slang, regardless of race, don't come across that way. Candidates who insist on speaking slang are less likely to be successful at work, regardless of race.

We all speak slang with our family and friends. Everyone. But expecting people to use standard English in business situations isn't racist or oppressive; it's making life as beneficial and easy as possible for potential customers.