Table 4-5 Pre- and Post-Conciliation Minority Share of Total Male Employment for Respondents and Peer Groups: || | (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 1966 1969 (2) less (1) 1966 1969 (5) less (4) Table 4-6 Pre and Post-Conciliation Minority Share of Total Female Employment for Respondents and Peer Groups: 3-Digit SIC Observation (3) (4) (5) (6) 12345678 0.0 0.0 9.1 0.0 - 9.1 Respondent Peer Group 1966 1969 (2) less (1) 1966 1969 (5) less (4) (1) (2) 0.0 0.0 0.0 5.7 10.9 5.2 5.2 Table 4-7 1 Pre- and Post-Conciliation Relative Occupational Position of Minority Men for Respondents and Peer 1966 1969 (2) less (1) 1966 1969 (5) less (4) (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) 1 Minority Index of Occupational Position relative to Anglo Index of Occupational Position. Table 4-8 1 Pre and Post-Conciliation Relative Occupational Position of Minority Women for Respondents and 1 Minority Index of Occupational Position relative to Anglo Index of Occupational Position. relative occupational index for respondent employment was higher than that of the peer group. In 6 of 26 paired observations, or 23 percent of the total, both measures of minority employment status for respondents surpassed that of their peers. These patterns closely parallel those of minority women. It appears, then, that the measures of minority employment for one out of four respondents involved in successful conciliation with race as an issue in 1967 and 1968 actually surpassed that of other firms in the same labor market and selling in the same product market. Clearly, this suggests that the generation of discrimination charges by individual complainants is not an efficient means of identifying employment discrimination. For every firm identified as a discriminator through private complaints there were many others who were not. The size of peer groups at the 2-digit SIC level, for example, varied from 3 to 7 firms. The dimensions of the problem grow when only one form of employment status 4/ at a time is considered. Using minorities' share of total employment and their relative occupational index, by sex, as measures of employment status, the t-test of paired observations shows no statistically significant relationship between successful conciliation and change of minority employment status at either the 2-digit or 3-digit SIC level (see Table 4-9). The mean difference in minority employment changes of respondents and peer groups from 1966 to 1969 is positive for all except men and women's relative occupational index at the 3-digit level, but is not significantly different from zero. Stated in a different fashion, when the results of conciliation from 1967 and 1968 are viewed as a sample of Commission compliance experience, changes in minority employment status for respondents involved in successful conciliation do not differ on the average from those of peers who have not been involved in Commission compliance procedures. |