Introduction
In their article titled “Last Hired, First Fired?” Couch Kenneth and Fiarlie Robert investigate the notion that the African Americans are discriminated in the employment sector as opposed to their White counterparts. It has been largely thought that the African Americans were the last people to be hired during an economic boom while they were the first ones to be shown the sack in the event of a recession. Couch and Fiarlie (246) make the conclusion that in fact, the African Americans were the Last Hired but they believe that that they were not the First Fired.
The Research
The research was carried out on the background of the fact that the hypothesis that blacks were the Last Hired and First Fired was previously tested by examining the rates of employment in the business cycles. The weakness of this approach is that there have been no examinations of the cyclic movements out of and into unemployment (Couch and Fiarlie 227). To look at the idea more scientifically, the two elected to carry out a more comprehensive and representative research by looking at survey data spanning over fifteen years for the period of 1989-2004.
The first deduction they made is that the employment rate of the African Americans was half that of the white population for the period under study. The ratios arrived at for the unemployment rates for the blacks were 12.4% as opposed to that of the whites which was 5.4%. Based on this data, they make an informed judgment that the assertion that the unemployment rates of whites was half that of the blacks to be factual (Couch and Fiarlie 227). As a rule of thumb, a good research should have comprehensive data and the inference should be based on scientific observations. This is something that the two did as seen in their analysis of the data set.
The purpose of the research is maintained through out the article and as one goes through it, there is clarity of the main idea that is being investigated which is necessary for a good research. Couch and Fiarlie investigate the concept by looking at the survey data as well as looking at some other analyses by other experts. All the cited experts agree to the fact that the employment rate of the whites was higher than that of the African Americans.
The conclusion arrived at by Couch and Fiarlie that the blacks were last hired is not convincing. The assertion is based on their personal observation and all the other experts that have been quoted in the article don’t seem to subscribe to this view. The explanation they give to the assertion is at best vague. They say that unemployed blacks were hired in the early stages of the business cycle and they were later on in the cycle drawn from the employed segment (246).
The question was whether the employment rates were different across the races and it would not be expedient to state that the African Americans were reemployed. Taking staff from their current position to a new position should not be considered as employment as it is merely a promotion or a demotion but the employment status of the staff has not changed from being employed to being unemployed or from being unemployed to being employed.
Conclusion
Couch and Fiarlie’s article follows the good criteria of business research. The research carried out is based on reliable data which is comprehensive. The two conclusions arrived at can be looked at differently. The first conclusion that the employment rates of the black race was half that of the white race is clearly researched and the conclusion can be said to be scientific. The second conclusion that African Americans were not the first to be fired is based on their personal opinion and is not well backed up with empirical evidence which contravenes the quality of a good research.
Work Cited
Couch, Kenneth and Fiarlie Robert. Last Hired, First Fired? Black-White Unemployment and the Business Cycle. Demography, 47.1(2010):227-247.