In Name Only

How many times does research have to prove something for it to become acknowledged as fact? 

I have no idea how many times I've read about studies where researchers sent resumes that differed merely in the person's name, only to find that applicants with Black-sounding names were less likely to be contacted about job openings. 

Here's another one.

These researchers sent resumes to about 100 large companies (80,000 of them for 10,000 job openings over three years), and found that white-named applicants were contacted an average of 9.5% more often. That average is a bit misleading, though, because 20% of the companies were responsible for half of the discrepancy, and just two companies were the worst of all. 

One was a used car dealer I've never heard of (AutoNation), which contacted white applicants 43% more often, and the other was an auto parts company whose group of brands includes NAPA. They called white people 33% more often.

Companies requiring lots of interaction with customers, like sales and retail, particularly in the auto sector, were most likely to show a preference for applicants presumed to be white. This was true even when applying for positions at those firms that didn’t involve customer interaction, suggesting that discriminatory practices were baked in to corporate culture or human resources practices, the researchers said.

The researchers pointed out that large companies are probably less likely to discriminate than smaller companies, so this study is more likely to underestimate the rate, if anything.

The industries that were the least likely to discriminate on race were food stores, food products, wholesale businesses, and freight/transportation.