January Currents Issue,  2005

Helping Unions Implement Anti-Discrimination Programs

Ralph Garcia, LMSW, Program Director, The WIA Project in Sheet Metal Training

On August 28, 1975, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found Local 28, of the Sheet Metal Workers’ International Association, guilty of discrimination based upon race and national origin. On July 2, 1986, after a series of appeals by Local 28, the United States Supreme Court upheld the 1975 order, including the use of affirmative action as remedy for past discrimination against minority groups. This case is still active in the federal courts due to allegations of noncompliance by Local 28.

The order provided for a broad range of supportive services for minority Local 28 members geared towards enhancing minority enrollment and retention in the trade. In 1983, as part of a contempt remedy, Local 28 was ordered to fund an “Employment, Training, Education, and Recruitment Fund” (ETER Fund). That Fund, under the supervision of a court appointed administrator, is notable for having created two unique remedial programs in which social workers have figured prominently.

The first program, “The Workforce Investment Act Project in Sheet Metal Training” (WIA Program), combining ETER Fund money with governmental job training grants, creates a hiring mechanism that recruits, tutors, tests, counsels, and ultimately places, predominantly minority applicants, into lucrative union–run sheet metal apprenticeships in Local 28. The second program, the Local 28 “Members Assistance Program” (the MAP), provides an aggressive array of counseling, support, and advocacy services geared towards minority retention in Local 28.

Each program is run by MSW- level social workers with expertise in occupational social work. The programs have made a substantial contribution to the goals of the court order. For example, the graduation rate for minority apprentices in Local 28 is now equal to the rate for non-minority apprentices. Prior to implementation of these programs, the minority termination and dropout rate was seven times the rate for whites.

What in particular about the social worker has helped facilitate the successful implementation of these judicial remedies? The answer is basic. We argue that it no longer suffices to analyze racially disparate impact merely as the result of bad actions on the part of individual agents. Today, it seems, disparate impact must be considered in a layered organizational context.

The experience is that, while individual overt acts of racism still can occur, it is more frequently the case that organizational decisions, on the part of the defendant, are made without significant analysis as to their systemic impact and, thus, can result in disparate treatment, even if the initial decision had nothing to do with race or ethnicity. Social workers, trained in the ability to analyze organizational structure and the capacity to plan interventions, with an eye towards their impact at increasingly deeper systems, have proven to be very effective within this judicially mandated model. The signature example of this expertise occurs when the social worker, called upon to assess a troubled individual client, automatically understands the need to factor in the dysfunctional nature of the employment system into the overall case management. This allows for a more complete and nuanced assessment, which, in turn, affords the opportunity for a more thorough and effective corrective intervention plan.

Back to World of Work Page                            Back to Home Page