The authors of this Bloomberg law op-ed lay out a case for why reopening college campus will increase racial inequality among workers. A thread on why I think evidence for the claim isn’t very strong. 1/n https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/insight-universities-should-stay-closed-to-protect-workers-of-color

Compared to much of US, higher education (HE) is a relatively good industry in which to work. Take, for example, health care coverage. 97% of employed workers in HE (all occupations) have some form of health care coverage, compared to 91% in other industries.

(Source: ACS) 2/n

The benefits of working in higher ed relative to other industries hold for all racial groups. For example, 95% of Non-Hispanic Black workers in HE have health care coverage, compared to 89% of Black workers outside of higher ed. 3/n

The 6 percentage point gap in health care coverage between HE and other industries among Black workers is a 13 percentage point chasm for Hispanic workers: 93% of Hispanic workers who work for colleges and universities have health care, compared to 80% outside. 4/n

To be sure, White workers in HE are yet more advantaged. E.g., 98% of white workers, compared to 95% of Blacks and 93% of Hispanics, have some form of health care coverage. Incomes also higher.

Even so, racial inequalities are smaller inside higher ed than outside it. 5/n

It is true that Black and Hispanic workers in higher ed are more likely to be found in the jobs that can’t be done remotely, and that put them in contact with students in residence halls and dining centers. Occupational segregation is pervasive in higher ed, as elsewhere. 6/n

But does this mean that reopening will increase racial inequality? The answer comes down to what you think will happen next fall, and in the longer term, if colleges and universities don’t reopen for residential instruction. 7/n

The authors of the op-ed envision a world in which every higher ed worker can work remotely or, if their jobs don’t allow it, be paid the same wages and have the same HC benefits while staying home, even if campuses don't reopen. This is ... unrealistic. 8/n

Even these authors’ institutions (Princeton, Duke, Yale, USC, Albany Law), some of wealthiest in US, have made at best vague promises to avoid layoffs. These institutions facing huge budget hit from greater financial aid costs, falling int'l tuition, covid-19 expenses, etc. 9/n

In this context, even wealthy institutions likely cannot, and probably will not, continue to pay workers wages and benefits if they cannot do their jobs remotely. And the majority of colleges & universities have no where near the resources of USC, Yale, Princeton, etc. 10/n

(You may be thinking, "but endowments!" No links, but I've seen some quite good reports out there -- maybe at Urban Institute? -- on how endowments work, why they aren't same as a savings account, and how few unis/colleges have appreciable ones.) 11/n

What about a collective solution? Many states are broke, and in this political climate the chances of the federal government bailing out higher ed in a meaningful way, or of adopting universal health care are remote. And by remote I mean 0. 12/n

The most likely scenario for fall, if campuses do not reopen, is layoffs, especially of housing and dining staff whose work is most closely tied to residential life, non-tenure line faculty, and lower-level admin support positions. 13/n

These laid-off workers will disproportionately be Black and Brown. And, even if they can find other work, they will lose whatever protections they had from being in a relatively high-benefit, relatively low racial inequality industry.

End result: more inequality, not less. 14/n

Are there other reasons not to reopen campuses? Possibly. But IMO "it will increase racial inequality" isn't a very good one, at least under realistic scenarios of the alternatives to reopening. 15/n