How was Warner able to supress the Black staff's salaries for so long?
Not to mention treating the Blacks with utter contempt. Seems like somebody would have blown the whistle long before the Reagan administration.
share[deleted]
I assume the OP's point is that it was a obvious racial inequality. You can't say the same with other minimum wage jobs, and from the looks of it, working for the white house seemed to give him extra money he didn't have before, so I'd guess he wasn't even working minimum wage. Though I could be confused considering he also worked long hours for many years. To me though, it looks like it's just an issue of a lack of a raise and job promotions for the black staff.
I know I left my last job because not only did we all stopped getting any raises, but we also stopped getting bonuses for new years. And my boss kept getting nicer and nicer cars, and a new house. We only had the crappiest of health insurances because he had to do it. He acts like he is a saint for even offering jobs to anyone. It's sickening what most wealthy people think of us common folk. Can't even start a family with these wages after years of hard work.
Not to dismiss--or even diminish--the plight of the working man, my point was that, according to this movie, there was naked racial discrimination in the White House even while the civil rights movement was burgeoning under the Kennedy/Johnson administrations, as well as under subsequent administrations. Indeed, according this movie, it went on under Nixon even after the staff had apprised him of the situation and he promised to do something about it. One would think it would even violate the civil rights laws that were passed while it was going on. Given the press scrutiny of the White House, why would the situation never surface?
shareBurgeoning?
It is one thing for federal law to be passed another for it to be obeyed by the states.
It took more than one Civil Rights Bill and Voting Bill to be passed by Congress from the late 1950s to the mid 1960s precisely because of this difference.
The Civil Rights effort continued past Johnson's efforts at equal rights because there was no burgeoning. Voter suppression and outright discrimination occured long after federal law was passed.
MLK was in Memphis joining the protest by garbage men for proper treatment and pay in 1968! Three years after LBJ.
If all this resistance by states appointees and elected officials could take place how can you question whether or not an individual, even one employed at the White House, could not continue to discriminate?
1968 was not three years after LBJ, old man. He was president until 1969.
shareWow.
Three years after LBJ's Administration passed the latest at the time Civil Rights Bill.
That's what I meant but go ahead and make one year a big difference in the big scheme of things a matter of small mindedness as you have.
actually if you said 1968 was 3 years after LBJ but LBJ was president till 1969, that means you were 4 years off not 1, its called math.
shareVoter suppression and outright discrimination occured long after federal law was passed.
Moron, 1982 is LOONNNNNNNNGGGGGGG after. You make this idiotic argument trying to explain why this pay gap wouldn't be an issue. If it were 1962, maybe. Not 1972. SURE AS HELL NOT 1982.
There was no more resistance to the civil rights act in 19fing82. You're ridiculously wrong. You're argument is crap. It makes no sense why it would have gone on that long unnoticed. share
I am not unsympathetic to the the plight of those trying to raise a family in a weak economy. One thing many don't think about, is that there has to be perks for business owners in a free market. If not, no one would take a chance at starting a company. In our family business when things were going poorly, all our employees always got paid, had insurance, etc, but my husband and father in law didn't- for a long time. We also knew that if the business tanked, we would lose everything- our house, cars, credit, etc... The fear that we could lose everything was always there. It is difficult to see things from someone else's point of view sometimes, especially when times are hard. As far as the original topic, it seems unrealistic that the racial inequality would have persisted that long, but it is likely the staff were hesitant to come forward and complain?
shareNice propaganda speech
Do you have an answer to the question??
You don't have to stand tall, but you have to stand up!