Mobile Edition
Print
Get the Mag
Weekly UpdatesUS federal government agency workforces are typically believed to epitomize equal opportunity and embrace merit principles. The federal government has historically spearheaded policies and programs to mandate affirmative action, eradicate glass ceilings, and institute initiatives to recognize the achievements of and provide equal employment opportunities to all members of minority groups. Some agencies even integrate merit principles into their strategic missions and cultural climates. Yet, an analysis of federal agency employment data reveals that minorities still constitute a small percentage of higher level government employees in most agencies. While minorities make up a sizable percentage of lower level government employees, their percentages decline progressively up through the senior levels. In fact, the racial composition of some agencies' workforces mirrors that of the nation's population only at the lowest pay levels, and race is the leading category for equal employment opportunity charges filed by aggrieved federal employees. Agencies should, thus, examine minority employment at all pay levels, even if their aggregate percentages are comparable to the general population.
The lack of minority representation at senior levels raises the additional concern that federal agencies may not always address the needs of all U.S. citizens. Since top-level officials establish agencies' missions, set major policies, and determine agencies' goals, the composites of senior leaders in agencies that do not mirror the general population may not well represent all groups in the populace. According to Dolan, (1) in a representative democracy, a "bureaucracy composed of individuals who share the values and attitudes of the public at large will produce public policy that closely reflects the interests and desires of the public. Since the public is diverse in terms of race, religion, gender and social class, a demographically diverse bureaucracy will ideally include a variety of viewpoints and perspectives and produce policy that is consistent with public sentiments."
Accepting this definition, it follows that senior leaders in the bureaucracy of a representative democracy should include individuals who reflect the diversity of their constituents and their subordinates. Greene, Seldom and Brewer (2) stated this principle by writing, "The potential for individuals to be effective in an organization seems obviously to depend not just on their presence, but also on the rank of their positions in the bureaucratic hierarchy." Minority representation at higher pay levels in federal agencies is necessary to ensure that the needs and interests of all employees are considered and that multiple viewpoints are integrated when policies, regulations, and strategic directions are set.
Many executive and legal attempts have been made to ensure minorities are adequately represented in federal employment. For example, Executive Order 11478, originally signed on August 8, 1969, by President Richard Nixon, states, "It is the policy of the government of the United States to provide equal opportunity in federal employment for all persons, to prohibit discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, handicap, or age, and to promote the full realization of equal employment opportunity through a continuing affirmative program in each executive department and agency. This policy of equal opportunity applies to and must be an integral part of every aspect of personnel policy and practice in the employment, development, advancement, and treatment of civilian employees of the federal government." Later, the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 established a policy standard of a "federal workforce reflective of the nation's diversity."
President Bill Clinton took the most dramatic steps to ensure minorities were represented at the highest levels of government. He called for a government that "looks like America" and named more women and minorities to his Cabinet than any previous president. During Clinton's first term in office, approximately 25% of sub-Cabinet level positions were also held by minorities. Additionally, Clinton appointed Madeline Albright as the nation's first female secretary of state. (3)
These and other actions have resulted in some increases in minority representation in senior federal government positions over the last few decades. Still, progress toward making the federal workforce fully reflect the general population has been made mostly at the lowest levels, and much work remains to be done to ensure minorities are afforded opportunities to obtain high level positions.
Having a diverse workforce is no longer just a matter of meeting an agency's civic responsibility. It has become a matter of survival. Federal agencies serve customers who are diverse and who are sensitive about who provides services to them. Minorities are expected to make up 50% of the U.S. population by 2050. (4) Agencies must have diverse employees at all levels to serve their ever increasingly diverse constituencies. Also, suppliers, lawmakers, and media professionals are becoming more diverse and are closely monitoring federal agencies for similar developments. For example, more than one-quarter of the members of the 109th Congress women or non-Whites. Black representatives have increased their numbers from 19 in 1981-1983 to 42 in 2003-2005. These congressional members are undoubtedly somewhat sensitive to the racial composition the of senior agency leadership.
Measuring Diversity
Table 1 presents the percentage of the U.S. population by race, according to the 2000 Census. Whites constituted 69.1% of the population, Blacks were 12.1%, Hispanics were 12.6%, American Indians and Alaskan Natives were 0.7%, and Asians, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders were 3.7%. The remaining 1.8% of the U.S. people were people of other races or those who reported being of two or more races.
Table 2 shows the percentage of private sector jobs were held by members of each minority group in total during 2003, as well as private sector professional positions and federal General Schedule (GS) positions. Private sector professional occupations are comparable to public sector GS positions because the majority of both types of require incumbents to hold bachelor's degrees as a minimum qualification. In total, Blacks held 17.1% of all federal positions and 13.8% of all private sector positions. This 13.8% representation was in line with their percentage of Blacks in the general population. However, Blacks held 7.2% of private sector professional positions.
Hispanics were the perhaps the most underrepresented in government positions (7.2%) and in private sector professional positions (4.1%) because they made up 12.6% of the general population. Asians and Pacific Islanders were well-represented in private sector professional positions (8.9%) and in government positions (4.8%) considering they made up 3.7% of the general population. The same can be concluded from analyzing the representation of American Indians and Alaskan Natives.
Comparatively, Table 3 shows the number and percentage of white-collar employees in GS and senior-level government positions by race across the federal government as of September 30, 2004. Senior pay levels include positions above the GS-15 grade (i.e., members of the Senior Executive Service). At the lowest levels, grades GS-01 through GS-04, minorities constituted 43.3% of the workforce. Their percentage fell to 33.9% at the mid-level grades GS-05 through GS-12. For positions in grades GS-13 through GS-15, those occupied by candidates for senior positions, minorities were 21.5% of the workforce. These percentages held for Cabinet departments, which account for approximately 90% of federal government employment.
In the early 2000s, then, minorities made up 30.9% of the general U.S. population and held 31.1% of federal jobs. The percentage of Blacks in the federal workforce (17.1%) surpassed that of the general population (12.15%). However, those percentages diverge greatly when only higher level government positions are considered. Minorities held only 21% of GS-13, GS-14, and GS-15 positions, and only 14% of positions above the grade of GS-15. At the same time, Whites were 69.1% of the general U.S. population and held 56.7% of lower level government positions. White also held 66.1% of mid-level government positions and 86% of the most-senior government positions.
Blacks made up 12.1% of the general U.S. population and were highly represented in lower level (24.2%) and mid-level federal government positions (19.1%). Blacks held only 6.5% of senior positions, however. As shown in Table 3, Hispanics were even more underrepresented in the highest levels of government employment. While Hispanics made up 12.6% of the general population, they held only 3.5% of senior positions.
The degree to which an organization's workforce mirrors the racial composition of the general population can be represented using the Lieberson index. Table 4 presents Lieberson index scores for federal agencies with the greatest numbers of employees. The scores were calculated using the formula s
Lieberson Diversity Score = 1 - (x[1.sup.2] + x[2.sup.2] + ... + x[n.sup.2])
In which 1 represents a complete match between the percentage of a minority groups' members in the general population and the percentage of a minority groups' members in the agency, and xl-xn represents the actual percentages of each minority group's members' employment with the agency. The actual percentages are squared and added before being subtracted from 1.
During 2003, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), and the Small Business Administration (SBA) had the highest diversity scores. At the EEOC, 54.06% of senior pay level positions were held by minorities. The respective rates for HUD and the SBA were 40.38% and 32.69%. Each of these agencies also had comparable Lieberson index scores for high level positions and for their total workforce. In comparison, the Department of Veteran's Affairs, to take one example of wide divergence, has an overall score of .5407, but this falls to .2454 for senior positions.
FEED