Red vs. Blue States: Cases of Employment Discrimination Influenced by Geography?

Authors

  • Andre L. Honoree Southeastern Louisiana University
  • David Terpstra Eastern Washington University
  • John Friedl University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18533/ijbsr.v4i3.433

Keywords:

employment discrimination, red vs. blue states,

Abstract

The seemingly increasing political divide in the United States between Democrats and Republicans has often resulted in both parties working to advance their ideology rather than forge a consensus with the other side.  This polarization can often be seen in the geography of the nation which can characterize most of the states as either solidly “red” (Republican/conservative) or “blue” (Democratic/liberal).   With federal judges appointed by the President and confirmed by members of Congress, one wonders if these politically appointed judges reflect in their rulings the ideology of those who appointed/confirmed them and/or if the “color” of the state in which they preside has any bearing on the number of cases brought before them.   In a random sample of federal employment discrimination cases (n=657), this study sought to examine the influence of geographic location and the political ideology/leanings of states may have on both the frequency and outcomes of employment discrimination claims.  The results revealed noteworthy and significant differences between states in both the frequency (more or less cases than would be expected to be filed based on relative population size) and degree of plaintiff success/failure in such cases.  As a result of these findings, implications are advanced for employees and employers as a consequence of these geographic and political differences.     

Author Biographies

  • Andre L. Honoree, Southeastern Louisiana University

    Dept. of Management and Business Administration

    Associate Professor of Management

  • David Terpstra, Eastern Washington University

    Department of Management

    Professor of Management

  • John Friedl, University of Tennessee at Chattanooga

    Department of Acounting

    Professor of Accounting

References

REFERENCES

Brooks, D. (2001). One nation, slightly divisible. The Atlantic Monthly, 28(5) 53-65.

Farhi, P. (2004). Elephants are red, donkeys are blue: Color is sweet, so their states we hue. Washington Post, Nov. 2, 2004, p. C01.

Friedl, J., & Honoree, A. (2007). Is justice blind? Examining the relationship between presidential appointments of judges and outcomes in employment discrimination cases. Cumberland Law Review, 38(1) 89-99.

Gelman, A., Park, D., Shor, B., Fafumi, J., & Cortina, J. (2008) Red State, Blue State, Rich State, Poor State: Why Americans vote the way they do; Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Monson, R., & Mertens, J.B. (2011). All in the family: Red states, Blue states, and postmodern family patterns, 2000, 2004. Sociological Quarterly, 52(2), 244-267.

Raskin, J. (2008). Neither the red states nor the blue states but the United States: The national popular vote and American political democracy. Election Law Journal, 7(3), 188-195.

Rugy, V.D. (2011). The red/blue paradox. Reason, 43(4), 18-19.

Terpstra, D.E., & Kethley, R. B. (2002 A). The influence of location and relative degree of risk of selection discrimination litigation. Employment Relations Today, 28(4), 9-25.

Terpstra, D.E., & Kethley, R. B. (2002 B) Organizations’ relative degree of exposure to selection discrimination litigation, Public Personnel Management, 31(4), 277-293.

United States Census (2010). (2013, January 24). Retrieved from the United States Census website: http://2010.census.gov/2010census/

Werner, J.M., & Bolino, M.C. (1997). Explaining U.S. courts of appeals decisions involving performance appraisal: Accuracy, fairness, and validation. Personnel Psychology, 50, 1-24.

Downloads

Published

2014-03-21

Issue

Vol. 4 No. 3 (2014): March

Section

Article

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  • Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  • Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  • Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).