Black Women's Employment Project Fundraising and Proposal (Folder)

    i n i

NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. 
u n d  99 Hudson Street, New York, N.Y. 10013*(212) 219-1900

Making the Work Ethic Work:
Strategies to Increase the Income cf Working Poor Black Women

A P R 0 P C S

Submitted by:

Jean Fairfax, Director 
Division of Legal Information 

and Communitv Service

Contributions are deductible for U.S. income tax purposes



WILEY A. BRANTON

JULIUS lĵ vonnb chambers 

JAMES M. KABRJT, Hi

Naiimial Office.rs 
WILLIAM T. COLEMAN, JR,

CONNIE S. LINDAU

ELEANOR S. APPLEWHAITE

BILLAE SUBER AARON 

CLARENCE A\ANT 

MARIO L. BAEZA 

JOHN T. BAKER 

ALICE M- BEASLEY

J, THOMAS FRANKLIN 

CHARLES V. HAMILTON

GLENDORA MelLWAIN PI 

HARRIET RABB

CHARLES B, RENFREW

MRS. SAMUEL I, ROSENM 
New York, N.Y.

HARVEY 0. RUSSELL

L CLARKE 
York. N. Y.
IB D. CANNON,

ADRIAN W. DeWlND

ANTHONY DOWNS 

ROBEjftT R DKINAN, S,J. 

CHARLES T. DUNCAN 

MARIAN WEIGHT EDELMA 

CHRISTOPHER F. EDLEY 

DR. HELEN G. EDMONDS

ANN HUTOHINSO; 

JETTA N. JONES 

DR. ANNA J. JULL 

HARRY KAHN

ROBERT McIXIUGAL, JR

GEORGS E. MARSHALL, 

ROBERT C. MAYNARD

MRS. ELLlOjr M. OGDEN. J 

BARRINGTON D. PARKER. J

ROBERT S. TOTTER 

HUGH B, PRICE

L SCHEIDE

ORVILLE IL SCHELL, JP 
New York, N. Y,

BERNARD G. SEGAL 
Philadelphia. Pa.

JACOB SHEINKMAN 
New York. N. Y.

SIMKI.NS.J

E, THOMAS W 

KAREN HASTIE; I 

ANDREW YOL'NG

“COMMITTEE OF 100”

K T I f ”Arthur E, Ashe 
Joan Baez Birch Bayh

Muriel M. Buttinger Diahann Carroll
Shbley Ch'isSm 
Ramsey Clark

Thfi;c-re-v» Hesburoh
jaĉ .i‘riviir“'
John H.jol-n.son 
Mrs. Percy JulianVivian J. Beanton 

Harry Belafonte Saul Belbw 
I,erone Bennett, Jr. John C. Bennett 
Viola W. Bernard Leonard Bertateir. 
Hans A, Bethe

Aaron Copland Bill Cosby 
Maxwell Dane

i l S s r
John Ho|̂  Franklin 
Kenneth A. GiLson 
Harry D. Gideonse

EthefKennelŷ '’ ̂

W, Ariiiur Lewis .

s s s T x ' r

Sidney
Josepn L. Rauh, Jr.

Eugene Carson Blake 
Sarah Gibson Bianding Henrv̂ L Mare^U 

William James McGill
John R Spiegel W’llkam Stvron Telford TaylorHenry T. Bourne 

George RBroekwaŷ  ^ Roland B. Gittelso'nn 
Charles E. Goodel! 
Rk-harlo 1?g‘bher

Linda B. McKean
KaHMenmnger

The "Commlltcv (!■ lA ■ n V!)!'.
p L T /? h f  N aY c

Headed hi Bishcp

Fund.' Inc. 
desegreSrati

•Since 1943 to enable the P 
bn a reality thnmghout the I.Jnited States.

rd “ i 2 " “ » t e



The Census Bureau recently reported that 35.5 percent of black 
Americans were poor in 1982. Even counting non-cash assistance,
21.5 percent were poor, an increase of 44 percent since 1979. The 
deteriorating economic status of blacks generally should be sufficient 
evidence to give a high priority to strategies specifically targeted 
to enhancing the income potential of black women. In two-parent 
households, black women's earnings often determine whether families 
are economically viable. More important, the staggering number of 
families headed by women —  47.5 percent today —  is the major con­
tributing factor to the increase in black poverty and threatens to 
undo gains in closing income disparities between blacks and whites 
that appeared hopeful a decade ago. Almost 60 percent of these 
families are poor.

Concern about black families headed by women has largely focused 
on pathology and family disorganization and its impact on the 
future prospects for black youth, for 78.6 percent of the children 
in these families are poor. The conventional wisdom is that these 
families are unstable, welfare-dependent and deviants from the 
nuclear family norm.

Few look for the strengths in these families. Few regard the 
women who head them as valuable human resources. A major strength 
in black women is their identification with work. 40 percent of 
black women were in the workforce in 1890. Almost a century later, 
in 19831 70 percent of black women 25 - 44 years old were in the



labor force. Black women expect to work throughout their lives 
and to provide for themselves and their dependent relatives, as 
well as to seek personal fulfillment. This work orientation should 
be viewed as a plus —  a potential resource in the search for solu­
tions, as concerned Americans address poverty in the black com­
munity. The problem is that although the majority of black women 
who head families are in the workforce —  54.5 percent —  they 
are still poor. Their work is not the avenue of escape from poverty 
and enables them to provide adequately neither for themselves nor 
for their dependents.

The New York Times, March 31, 1984, reported two studies on 
the impact of the 1981 cutbacks in Federal welfare programs, especially 
the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). The General 
Accounting Office, confirming the strong work ethid among America's 
poor, reported that the victims of these cuts increased their work 
effort, but suffered large net losses in income —  i.e., they were 
actually poorer when they worked more to offset the cutbacks.
The Center for the Study of Social Policy reported that "Federal 
budget cuts enacted in 1981 doubled the number of families in 
poverty among a sample of working-poor female headed familes in 
Michigan and New York City."

Insecurity in their workplaces, financially unrewarding work 
despite high work levels, and heavy responsibilities for other 
family members combine to place working poor black women who are 
heads of households at risk and under considerable stress as bread­
winners.

The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) has had a 
long history of successful efforts to eliminate patterns of racial

- 2 -



discrimination in workplaces. Confronted with the current reality, 
we asked ourselves: Can we build on this experience and help stem
the rising tide of black poverty by enhancing the status in the 
world of work of black women who head families and who are among 
the working poor?

We sought the assistance of black women researchers and com­
missioned two papers. Uncertainty and Risk in Low-Income Black Working 
Women, by Dr. Bette Woody and Dr. Michelene Malson at the Wellesley 
College Center for Research on Women, reviews the participation in 
the labor market of black women, especially heads of households, 
who work in low-wage occupations. Low-Wage Black Women: Occupation­
al Descriptions, Strategies for Change, by Dr. Julianne Malveaux, 
an economist at San Francisco State University, sets a larger 
framework for our concerns by providing an historic and current 
overview of black women in the labor force and recommends strategies 
to be explored.

OUR FINDINGS
The current status of working poor black women who are heads 

of households has been described in detail in our background papers 
that are enclosed. Among the highlights are the following:

1. The majority of black women who head families work, but 
the earnings of almost 36 percent of black household heads

are at or below the poverty level. Black women are 6 percent of the 
national workforce but 28 percent of poor working women. 52 percent 
of black working women are among the "near poor," i.e., within 
1 - 1.49 percent of the poverty level.

2. Poor black working women are more dependent on earnings 
than white women. 82.32 percent of the income of black

- 3 -



women who head families comes from earnings, in comparison to 
78.25 percent of white women's income. White women receive a larger 
proportion of their income from public assistance and child sup­
port than black women. The difference is especially large for 
women with children under five. White women with children under 
five receive 17.2 percent of income from public assistance and 8.9 
percent from child support, in comparison to 9 percent and 3.7 per­
cent respectively for black women heads of households.

3. The labor force participation of black women heads of 
households is high, irrespective of the presence, number

and age of their children. Poor black working mothers have major 
child-rearing responsibilities. In families headed by black women, 
60.9 percent of children six to thirteen years and 48 percent under 
six have mothers in the workforce. Black mothers with children 
under five work more hours per week than any other category of female 
householders. 82.3 percent of families headed by women, with no 
spouse present, have children under eighteen. Almost 60 percent have 
school-age children. In the majority of families, the mother is 
the only adult present.

4. Black and white women exhibit different occupational and 
work patterns. Both are "crowded" —  to use Malveaux'

very descriptive term —  into a narrow band of industries. Within 
female-intensive occupations, as well as those where one or both 
groups are underrepresented, there are significant differences in 
relative proportions of their earnings below poverty levels. Black 
women are more crowded than whites into the lowest paying and least 
rewarding jobs.

* Significant numbers of black and white women

- 4 -



are employed in non-durables manufacturing.
But 23.49 percent of blacks in apparel earn 
below poverty in comparison to 6.09 percent 
of white women.
There are occupations in the durables manu­
facturing category where blacks have a higher 
representation than white women. Yet 23.87 per­
cent of black women in instruments manufactur­
ing earn below poverty wages in comparison to 
1.20 percent of white women workers.
In some occupations that hire a considerable 
number of women, blacks are underrepresented 
and those that are employed, work in the 
lowest jobs. Black women are employed at 
only half the rate of white women in printing 
and publishing and are not represented in 
the professional, technical, managerial and 
clerical jobs. 11.40 percent of blacks in 
this occupation, but only 4.15 percent of 
white women earn poverty wages.
In the health industry, a major source of jobs 
for women, employing 15 percent of white women 
and 20 percent of black women, strikingly dif­
ferent patterns by race are present. Black 
women are concentrated in non-hospital jobs 
(home based care, convalescent homes) where 
20 percent earn poverty wages. Blacks who 
are employed in hospitals, where they are

- 5 -



generally underrepresented, are LPN's and sub­
professional , maintenancerclerical and food 
service workers; 10.56 percent of them earn 
poverty wages. White women work in physicians’ 
offices and in the higher, specialized occupa­
tions in hospitals. Only 1.45 percent earn at 
or below the poverty level.

* Some occupations where median women's wages
in 1981 were below poverty and where black women 
are overrepresented are: ironers/pressers;
laundry and dry cleaning; sewers/stitchers; 
dressmakers; produce handlers; welfare service 
aids; school monitors; child care workers, food 
counter workers,

5. Black women have moved over, but not up. The proportion 
of black women in household employment dropped dramati­

cally from 60 percent in 1940 to 6 percent in 1981. But this occupa­
tional diversification was essentially a shift from one set of 
stratified jobs to another. More than 70 percent of black women 
were in low wage occupations in 1981. Black women increased their 
representation in traditionally female white collar jobs that 
whites were leaving. 29.5 percent of black women were in clerical 
jobs in 1981, in contrast to 8 percent in 1960. Black women are 
now overrepresented in a set of jobs in which they were under­
represented just 20 years ago but most of these provide only poor 
or near poor wages: file clerks, clerical assistants, typists,
health service workers, etc.

5'. In 1982, the median annual income for fulltime black

- 6 -



women workers was 53.1 percent of white males' and 
89.5 percent of white females' median income. A comparison of 
the mean hourly wages of women below poverty, reveals that the 
earnings of poor black women are about 90 percent of white 
women's. Even in female-intensive occupations, black women earn 
less than white males: 58 percent of male wages in clerical;
55 percent in sales; 56 percent in service work; 32 percent in 
private household employment. 59 percent of black women employed 
in service jobs are crowded and employed where women's fulltime, 
full-year pay is below the poverty level. 30 percent of black 
women operatives earn well below the poverty levels.

7. Both black and white low-income women workers have high 
rates of involuntary parttime employment. 43.29 per­

cent of low-income black women work parttime. The impact of in­
voluntary parttime work on hourly wages and income is substantial 
and contributes to the high level of below poverty incomes. Some 
industries may deliberately organize work to avoid paying fringe 
benefits and pressures for advancement. Women who work involuntarily 
are concentrated in the least desirable female-intensive jobs. 
Involuntary parttime work contributes to stress. The 9-5 National 
Survey on Women and Stress reported:

While white women part-timers... are much less 
likely to describe their jobs as very stress­
ful, black women parttimers are more likely to 
describe part-time jobs as very stressful, sug­
gesting that they are 'involuntary' part-time 
workers who would work fulltime if they could.

-■ 7 -



8. Black and white low-income women have strikingly low 
rates of coverage in both employer-paid pensions and

group health. Of black women who head households and have children 
under 18, fewer than one-third are covered by pensions and only 
about 43 percent by group health. Lower coverage for black women 
exists in non-durables manufacturing, transportation, communications, 
utilities, retailing and in professionally related industry categories.

9. Black women workers feel threatened by many developments 
in the world of work: technological developments that

are projected to eliminate or sharply reduce entire categories of_ 
jobs; the restructuring of work that may downgrade and routinize 
certain kinds of office work; the transfer of jobs from inner cities 
to predominantly white rural areas or out of the country; reductions 
in force as governments cut budgets. Little attention has been 
given yet to what may become a major trend: the privatization of
public services as governments turn over the delivery of major 
systems, such as health care, to private for-profit agencies. The 
potential for the exploitation of low-income minority and female 
workers exists as these employers watch their "bottom lines" and 
seek to reduce their major cost, which is labor. The 9-5 survey 
mentioned above reported that the majority of black women inter­
viewed (and these were not all poor women) feel insecure in their 
present jobs.

10. Our major finding, clearly, is that racism and sexism have
created structures of discrimination that are mutually rein­

forcing. Strategies to enhance the economic status of working poor 
black women who are heads of household must recognize this inter­
locking relationship and address it.



THE PROPOSED LDF PROGRAM
LDF proposes to launch a new program that would have the 

following objectives and components during its first three years: 
Objectives

* To assist young black women in their efforts to 
avoid getting locked into low-paying, dead-end jobs;

* To move a significant number of black women out of 
female-intensive, low-paying jobs and into nontradi- 
tional occupations where black women are currently 
underrepresented and where the prospects for job. 
security are favorable;

* To improve the working conditions of black women 
who choose to stay in their current occupations.

Program Components
* PROJECT ALERT: Challenging Sexism and Racism in

Vocational Education and Training
* Litigation to Challenge Discrimination in 

Employment
* Comparable Worth
* Privatization of Public Services
* Administrative Challenges to Occupational Health 

Hazards
* A Legislative Component
* Health Care Industry Project
1. PROJECT ALERT: Challenging Sexism and Racism in Vocation­

al Education and Training
83 percent of families headed by black women under 24 
are poor. Young black women have, extremely high unemploy­

ment rates. In 1982, 45.3 percent of 18-19 year black women and

- 9 -



26.8 percent of 20-24 year old black women were unemployed. Pre­
vention of life-long poverty must begin with the young.

Targeting training resources to those young people who 
will experience future structural unemployment, under­
employment , inadequate earnings, and thus labor-market 
economic hardship is an important long-term solution.

Not Working; Unskilled Youths and Displaced Adults 
A Working Paper from the Ford Foundation, 1983

LDF will continue and expand PROJECT ALERT, our national 
effort to combat patterns of racism and sexism in vocational educa­
tion and other training programs. We have played a major role in 
shaping Federal programs to enforce nondiscrimination in vocational 
education; have conducted investigations to expose noncompliance by 
states, community college systems and local school districts; have 
mobilized citizens to promote more effective linkages between schools 
and the world of work; and have filed administrative complaints in 
which we have charged states with illegal procedures for allocating 
vocational education funds and with failure to enforce nondiscrimina­
tion.

PROJECT ALERT, as a component of the new program will:
* challenge ability grouping to prevent the mis- 

classification of blacks into tracks that fore­
close the possibility of their enrollment in 
academic courses in high school that are the 
prerequisites for postsecondary training. (The 
lack of math and science is an especially im­
portant barrier for black girls);

* challenge exclusionary policies and practices 
(especially regarding access, placement and staff 
hiring) in those postsecondary vocational schools.



comnmnity colleges and apprenticeship training 
programs that prepare young people for premium 
skilled jobs and trades;

* advocate before administrative agencies and 
present testimony to Congressional committees
to assure that the necessary supportive services, 
e.g., child care and financial aid, are avail­
able for women students in training programs;

* expand our outreach to minority, grassroots and 
feminist groups that have not addressed sexism 
and racism in vocational education to urge 
higher' priority to combatting institutional 
barriers to premium training for poor minority 
women and to brief them about the laws and tools 
available to challenge discrimination successfully.

2. Litigation to Challenge Discrimination in Employment 
LDF will develop a litigation program to challenge 
patterns of discrimination in carefully selected occupa­

tions where black women are underrepresented or clustered in low 
pay grades. Priority will be given to industries and job categories 
that are nontraditional for black women, that have a future (pre­
ferably those that are growing), and that are not immediately sub­
ject to technological restructuring or export out of the country.

3. Comparable Worth
Calling comparable worth "one reasonable, if experimental, 

approach to righting those wrongs" of disparities in pay, the 
New York Times stated in an editorial on February 17, 1984, that 
proving discrimination is a "heavy burden for women, but not an

- 11 -



insurmountable one." LDF will accept this heavy but not insurmount­
able burden and identify a group of women for whom comparable worth 
strategies have the potential to succeed.

An earlier article in the New York Times, reporting that 
18 states have already undertaken pay equity/job evaluation studies, 
indicated that those among them that do not undertake remedial 
action might be vulnerable to litigation. Black women welfare workers 
in the Illinois and Cook County Public Aid Departments recently won 
a $15 million back pay award in a pay equity suit. Inasmuch as 
black women are 27.9 percent of welfare service aides and_received 
in 1982 a median salary that was at the poverty level, assuring 
pay equity for them in other states would be one way to enhance the 
economic status of black women who choose to remain.in their present 
occupations. Most of the emphasis at the present time is on govern­
ment as an employer. Inasmuch as 40 percent of black women at all 
income levels are employed by governments, justice for a significant 
number of them might be an attainable goal. A Federal study rs 
underway that might suggest a course of action for LDF that would 
enlarge our already substantial Federal litigation program.

A lead article in the New York Times on January 1, 1984,
"A New Push to Raise Women's Pay,"' suggested private industries 
that might be explored as targets: communications, food service,
health service, high tech, glass and restaurants.

4. Priva'biza'bion of Public Servicss
LDF will explore strategies to protect black women 
workers who are placed at risk as the delivery of 

public services is transferred to private for profit agencies.
For consideration are: the development of model bills that mxght

- 12 -



be enacted by city councils, county commissions or state legisla­
tures to prevent tbe exploitation of low—income workers; use of 
the media to expose the impact on vulnerable minority women of 
such transfers; litigation against interstate chains of nursing 
home operators or hospital corporations; and legal and technical 
assistance to employees of such chains in their efforts to unionize, 
(The Food & Commercial Workers and Service Employees' recently 
negotiated memorandum of understanding with Beverly Enterprises, 
the nation's largest nursing home chain, may be a precedent.)

5. Administrative Challenges to Occupational Health- Hazards, 
Inasmuch as many black women are concentrated in industries 
that are hazardous as well as low-wage, challenging viola­

tions of Federal and State regulations should be a component of 
this new program. LDF will build upon and translate into this area, 
the considerable experience that we have accumulated in the last
15 years in the use of administrative remedies. This has involved 
filing administrative complaints, actions to compel enforcement of 
existing laws and regulations, and monitoring all directed toward 
shaping administrative enforcement machinery.

6. A Legislative Component
The growing number of black elected officials challenges 
us to develop a legislative component for this program, 

that would be largely, but.not exclusively, targeted to non-Federal 
levels of government. One LDF service might be to design model 
bills to be introduced by black city councilman, county commissioners, 
or state legislators, or regulations to be promulgated by executive 
order or administrative authority. Areas to be explored might be: 
portable pensions, interpretation of existing or creation of new

- 13 -



fringe benefit packages to include low-income and/or parttime 
workers; expansion of state funded financial aid programs to in­
clude low—income working women who enroll as parttime students; 
child care, privatization of public services, etc.

7. Health Care Industry Project
We anticipate a major focus on health care as a growth 
industry that exhibits most of the problems we identified 

in our findings: black crowding within female-intensive occupa­
tions; inequities in pay, privatization of public services; under­
representation of black women in better jobs, etc.

Program Pevelopment
On April 28, 1984, LDP's Board of Directors approved for 

implementation as a new program the proposal that is delivered above. 
It was launched with a Working Party that was hosted by the Johnson 
Foundation at its Wingspread Conference Center on May 21-23. 
Representatives of national and regional organizations, social 
scientists, attorneys, and women trade unionists were among the 
members of the Working Party who made recommendations to LDF con­
cerning critical issues, priorities for the new program and 
strategies that might effectively enable black working women to 
escape poverty. The report is attached.

We are now seeking $200,000 a year for the initial three 
years of this new program and would like to have it fully funded 
and staffed by January 1984. Meanwhile, the Ford Foundation has 
given LDF a grant of $25,000 for a Start-up Phase, September- 
December 1984, during which we are gathering some additional 
information and expanding our network among organizations of 
low-income black women. The objectives for the Start-up Phase,



that is being implemented with a team of consultants is as follows:
1. To design a health care industry project, with emphasis 

on employment- LDF has been strongly urged to underr*
take a major project that would address problems encountered by 
black women who are clustered in low—wage occupations in the 
health care industry, especially in the in-home care services- 
Inasmuch as the privatization of public services has progressed 
most rapidly in California, that consultant project is based there.

2. To identify industrial targets in the South for the 
new program. We need current and reliable information

about low-wage industries (e.g. poultry, textiles, apparel) that 
employ large numbers of black women, as well as about growing 
nontraditional jobs in the South. We need specific information 
about problems black women are facing and recommendations concern­
ing strategies and options. For example, for some low-wage in­
dustries, challenging occupational hazards might be the best 
strategy for improving working conditions. This consultant 
project is based in Little Rock.

3. To expand our network by visits to community based 
organizations in the South as well as in inner-cities

in the North that are addressing problems of low—income black 
women, to get input from them and to advise us of resources 
that would assist us in the new program- This consultant pro­
ject is based in Washington, D.C.

4. To make recommendations for strategies targeted to key 
Federal administrative agencies, such as those with

statutory responsibilities for safety in the workplaces, job 
training, elimination of sex and race discrimination, etc.



We are seeking $200,000 a year for three years to support the 
following budget:

$65,000 Program Director and Secretarial Support (New York)
50.000 PROJECT ALERT - Vocational Education Component:

25% of Project Director's Time Plus Expenses 
(Phyllis McClure, Washington, D.C. Office)

60.000 Lawyer-time and Litigation Costs 
20% of LDF National Staff Attorney
20% of Cooperating Attorney in the Field

10.000 Staff Travel
10.000 Program Costs, Consultations, Materials
5,000 National Office Expenses: Duplication, Telephone,Postage

B U D G E T



M E M O R A N D U M  
TO: Julius Chambers

June 18, 1985

Charlotte Rutherford 
Jean Fairfax
WORKING POOR BLACK WOMEN

V

Proposed Plan of Work June - December 1985
Interview all LDF national/attorneys, Phyllis McClure, and 
Butler Henderson; review prior program experiences of LDF; 
review LDF current docket: prepare summary of previous and
current involvements of LDF staff in litigation and other 
areas relevant to new program; experience we bring to new 
effort.
Review universe of organizations concerned about low-income 
black working women: prepare description and assessment of
their work and resources; identify potential for collaborative 
efforts.

A. National organizations
1. *Litigation, monitoring of Federal programs, advocacy,unions
2. Key persons: board and staff and constituencies
3. Organizational goals; program objectives;focus;current 

activities
4. Budget; source of funds

B. Regional and local
1. Nature and scope of current programs
2. Key persons: board, staff, constituencies
3. Budget, source of funds, resources

C. Research organizations and independent researchers/consultants
1. Compile information about studies already completed or 

underway
2. Identify issues requiring investigation3. Identify agencies;persons prepared to undertake such 

investigations especially pro bono or to help find funding
Establish LDF as clearing house of information on working poor 
black women: build library: develop file of clippings; get on 
mailing lists; subscribe to relevant publications
Compile information about issues before legislative and adminis­
trative bodies, especially Federal, or concern to poor women and 
girls (e.g. training) and who is addressing these issues

V. Cooperating attorneys
1. Letter introducing program and requesting information about 

relevant developments in their statesDevelop key contact list, especially of black women attorneys 
Prepare session or meeting of key persons at next Airlie Conference

VI. Fundraising; development
1. Develop new proposalConvene meeting of development staff to interpret program and 

prepare schedule for getting proposal before grantmakers 
Program reports to Ford, Aetna



VII. Public information
A. News release about program and objectives, maybe September
B. Interview key black media persons, e.g., Lewis of ESSENCE
C. Explore feasibility of occasional newsletter

VIII. Reports: plan regular reports to Chambers; comprehensive
90-day interim report on the above and 180 day final report . 
to include:

Issues; cases ripe for litigation; litigation areas to be 
explored; how issues might be addressed by nonlitigative strategies 
Legislative agenda; issues; potential and national and state 
levels
Ideas for regional projects
The team: LDF national staff; cooperating attorneys,
researchers; organizations with which LDF should collaborate



Memorandum

July 1, 1985

From: Julius Chambers
To; Charlotte Rutherford 
\  Barry Goldstein 
^Jean Fairfax 
Elaine Jones 
Phyllis McClure 
Steve Ralston

In order that Charlotte might learn about the developments in 
affirmative action and how those developments relate to the Black Women's Project and to assist Barry I would like for 
Charlotte to work on the appellate brief in Detroit v. Young.I understand that the appellant's brief is to be filed near 
the end of July and our brief will be due 30 days or more 
thereafter. (Barry mentioned an extension of time.)
Pending receipt of the appellant's brief, Charlotte should 
follow the schedule she developed with Jean. Charlotte should 
return to that schedule during the first week of September.
(I hope that she can attend to some of that schedule during 
August; she should, however, devote her time during August 
principally to the brief.)
Charlotte should do a weekly report on her activities and plans for the ensuing week. I am particularly concerned about 
development of a proposal for funding of the project as well 
as development of some litigation in connection with the project. 
I have spoken with Steve Ralston about assisting'Charlotte with 
litigation. Steve should also be consulted about the brief in 
Detroit, particularly during Barry's absence.
After the Detroit brief, I hope that Charlotte can devote all of her time during the next 60-90 days to the Women's Project, 
developing some focus and funding for the project. We need 
a major grant for the project before the end of the year.I will work directly with Charlotte beginning in September 
to assist with funding efforts.

/d



legal I ^ fenseF■OHund
NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC, 
99 Hudson Street, New York, N,Y. 10013«(212) 219-1900

July 30, 1985

Mr. J^es Wagele 
Bank America Foundation 
Department 3246, P.O. Box 37000 
San Francisco, California 94137
Dear Mr. Wagele:

The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) 
has launched a new program designed to increase the income of 
working poor black women who are heads of families and to address 
the problems they encounter in the workplace. LDF is seeking 
a $30,000 a year grant for the next three years from the 
Bank America Foundation to assist us in funding the initial 
implementation of the program. The total program budget is 
$300,000.per year.

The program objectives are: 1) to move a significant number 
of black women out of female-intensive, low-wage jobs into 
work that offers prospects for advancement and job security;
2) to assist young black women in their efforts to avoid being 
locked into low-paying jobs; and 3) to improve working condi­
tions for black women who remain in low-wage jobs.

The program has been in development for two years. In 
fashioning it, we have built upon LDF's extensive experience in tackling patterns of discrimination in employment and educa­
tion. Although poverty in the United States resists simplistic 
solutions, our research has convinced us that carefully crafted 
programs, targeted to the working poor, offer a clear opportuni­
ty to promote their move up in the American economy. The 
program seeks to help a struggling group obtain a decent 
standard of living for themselves and their children.

I am enclosing a proposal and budget for your considera­
tion. I would like to discuss this proposal with you and will 
be glad to provide any additional information you may need.
I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

(_yulius I Chambers 
Director-Counsel

Contributions are deductible fo r  U.S. income tax purposes



NAACP LEGAL DEFENSE AND EDUCATIONAL FUND, INC. und 99 Hudson Street, New York, N.Y. 10013*(212) 219-1900

Making the Work Ethic Work:
Strategies to Increase the Income of Working Poor Black Women

Submitted by:
Charlotte Rutherford 
DirectorBlack Women's Employment 

Program

Contributions are deductible fo r  U.S. income tax purposes



ROBERT H. PREISKEL 

WILEY A, BRANTON

JULIUS LeVONNE CHAMBERS 

JAMES M. NABRIT. Ill CONNIE S. LINDAU

ELEANOR S. APPLBWHAITE

BILLYE SURER AARON 

ANTHONY G. AMSTERDAM 

CLARENCE AVANT 

MARIO L. BAEZA 

JOHN T. BAKER 

ALICE M, BEASLEY

MARY FRANCES BERRY 
Washington. D.C.

HELEN L- BUTTENWIESEK

JACK G. CLARKE 

GEORGE D. CANNON, M.B. 

DR. I. H. CLAYBORN

TALBOT D'ALEMBERTE

PETER J. DeLUGA 

ADRIAN W. DeWIND 

ANTHONY DOWNS 

ROBERT F. DHINAK, SJ. 

CHARLES T. DUNCAN 

MARIAN WTJGHT EDELMAN 

CHRISTOPHER F. EDLEY 

DR. HELEN G, EDMONDS 

DAVID E. FELLER 

CLARENCE FINLEY

MARVIN E. PEANKEL 

DS, -JOHN HOPE FRANKLIN 

J. THOMAS FRANKLIN 

CHARLES V. HAMILTON

ELIOT HUBBARD, HI 

AF;N HUTCHINSON 

HERMAN JOHNSON

DR. ANNA J. JULIAN 

HARRY KAHN

NICHOLAS deB, KATZENBACH 

DAVIDE KENDALL 

ROBERT MeDOUGAL, JR, 

GEORGE E. MARSHALL, JR. 

ROBERT C. MAYNARD 

THE EIGHT REV, PAUL MOORE, J 

DR. JAMES M, NABRIT, JR.

ME8. ELLIOTT M, OGDEN, JR. 

BARRINGTON D. PARKER, JR. 

STEPHEN J. POLLAK 

ROBERT S. POTTER

GI-BNDORA Mcn.,W’AlN PUTNAM 
Boston, Maas,

HARRIET RARE 
New York, N. Y.

NORMAN REDLICH 
New York, N. Y.

CHARLES B. RENFREW

SAMUEL I. ROSENMAN

HARVEY C, RUSSELL 
Yonkers, N. Y,

BAYARD EUSTLN

WILLIAM H, aCHEIDE 
Princeton. N. J.

ORVILLE H- SCHELL, JR.

JACOB SHEINKMAN 
New York, N. Y.

DR, GEORGE C. SIMKINS. J 
Greensboro. N. C. 

MICHAEL I. SOVEKN 
New York, N. Y.

CHUCK STONE 
Philadelphia, Pa.

JAY TOPKI3 
New York, N. Y.

CYRUS VANCE

JAMBS VORENBERG

DR. ROBERT C. W'EAVEIt 
New York. N, Y.

REV. M. MORAN WESTON

SOGER W. WILKINAS 

E. THOMAS WILLIAMS. JE. 

KAREN HASTIE WILLIAMS 

ANDREW YOUNG

“COMMITTEE OF 100”

Arthur R. Ashe Joan Baez

Harry Belafonte 
^ul Be^w ^

iSs5‘'Carwn Blak

Marilyn Horne
John H. Johnson Mrs. Percy Julian 
Horace M, Kallen

ijJamc M.n
Roland B. Gitlelsohn Linda R M.KesnCharles E. G,»deil Karl Monnin'̂ .

rke RkharlGMIafcher Arthur MBA.MlTheodortrM. Hesburgh Anthony Newk-y

The “Committee of 100”. a voluntary cooperative group oi i? 
Paul Moore. Jr., has sponsored the appeal of the N.A.A.C.P. U  
Fund. Inc. since 1943 to enable the Fund to put into operation 
desegregation a reality throughout the United States.

©

S i S
Char?e'alf.'’s1fSi*



The Census Bureau recently reported that 35.6 percent of black 
Americans were poor in 1982. Even counting non-cash assistance,
21.5 percent were poor, an increase of 44 percent since 1979. The 
deteriorating economic status of blacks generally should be sufficient 
evidence to give a high priority to strategies specifically targeted 
to enhancing the income potential of black women. In two-parent 
households, black women's earnings often determine whether families 
are economically viable. More important, the staggering number of 
families headed by women —  47.5 percent today —  is the major con­
tributing factor to the increase in black poverty and threatens to 
undo gains in closing income disparities between blacks and whites 
that appeared hopeful a decade ago. Almost 60 percent of these 
families are poor.

Concern about black families headed by women has largely focused 
on pathology and family disorganization and its impact on the 
future prospects for black youth, for 78.6 percent of the children 
in these families are poor. The conventional wisdom is that these 
families are unstable, welfare-dependent and, deviants from the 
nuclear family norm.

Few look for the strengths in these families. Few regard the 
women who head them as valuable human resources. A major strength 
in black women is their identification with work. 40 percent of 
black women were in the workforce in 1890. Almost a century later, 
in 1983, 70 percent of black women 25 - 44 years old were in the



labor force. Black women expect to work throughout their lives 
and to provide for themselves and their dependent relatives, as 
well as to seek personal fulfillment. This work orientation should 
be viewed as a plus —  a potential resource in the search for solu­
tions, as concerned Americans address poverty in the black com­
munity. The problem is that although the majority of black women 
who head families are in the workforce —  54.5 percent —  they 
are still poor. Their work is not the avenue of escape from poverty 
and enables them to provide adequately neither for themselves nor 
for their dependents.

The New York Times, March 31, 1984, reported two studies on 
the impact of the 1981 cutbacks in Federal welfare programs, especially 
the Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC). The General 
Accounting Office, confirming the strong work ethic among America's 
poor, reported that the victims of these cuts increased their work 
effort, but suffered large net losses in income —  i.e. , they were 
actually poorer when they worked more to offset the cutbacks.
The Center for the Study of Social Policy reported that "Federal 
budget cuts enacted in 1981 doubled the number of families in 
poverty among a sample of working-poor female headed familes in 
Michigan and New York City."

Insecurity in their workplaces, financially unrewarding work 
despite high work levels, and heavy responsibilities for other 
family members combine to place working poor black women who are 
heads of households at risk and under considerable stress as bread­
winners .

The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) has had a 
long history of successful efforts to eliminate patterns of racial

- 2 -



discrimination in workplaces. Confronted with the current reality, 
we asked ourselves: Can we build on this experience and help stem
the rising tide of black poverty by enhancing the status in the 
world of work of black women who head families and who are among 
the working poor?

We sought the assistance of black women researchers and com­
missioned two papers. Uncertainty and Risk in Low-Income Black Working 
Women, by Dr. Bette Woody and Dr. Michelene Malson at the Wellesley 
College Center for Research on Women, reviews the participation in 
the labor market of black women, especially heads of households, 
who work in low-wage occupations. Low-Wage Black Women: Occupation­
al Descriptions, Strategies for Change, by Dr. Julianne Malveaux, 
an economist at San Francisco State University, sets a larger 
framework for our concerns by providing an historic and current 
overview of black women in the labor force and recommends strategies 
to be explored.

OUR FINDINGS
The current status of working poor black women who are heads 

of households has been described in detail in our background papers 
that are enclosed. Among the highlights are the' following:

1. The majority of black women who head families work, but 
the earnings of almost 36 percent of black household heads

are at or below the poverty level. Black women are 5 percent of the 
national workforce but 28 percent of poor working women. 52 percent 
of Black working women are among the "near poor," i.e., within 
1 - 1.49 percent of the poverty level.

2. Poor black working women are more dependent on earnings 
than white women. 82.32 percent of the income of black



women who head families comes from earnings, in comparison to 
78.25 percent of white women's income. White women receive a larger 
proportion of their income from public assistance and child sup­
port than black women. The difference is especially large for 
women with children under five. White women with children under 
five receive 17.2 percent of income from public assistance and 8.9 
percent from child support, in comparison to 9 percent and 3.7 per­
cent respectively for black women heads of households.

3. The labor force participation of black women heads of 
households is high, irrespective of the presence, number

and age of their children. Poor black working mothers have major 
child-rearing responsibilities. In families headed by black women, 
60.9 percent of children six to thirteen years and 48 percent under 
six have mothers in the workforce. Black mothers with children 
under five work more hours per week than any other category of female 
householders. 82.3 percent of families headed by women, with no 
spouse present, have children under eighteen. Almost 60 percent have 
school-age children. In the majority of families, the mother is 
the only adult present.

4. Black and white women exhibit different occupational and 
work patterns. Both are "crowded" —  to use Malveaux'

very descriptive term —  into a narrow band of industries. Within 
female-intensive occupations, as well as those where one or both 
groups are underrepresented, there are significant differences in 
relative proportions of their earnings below poverty levels. Black 
women are more crowded than whites into the lowest paying and least 
rewarding jobs.

* Significant numbers of black and white women



are employed in non-durables manufacturing.
But 23.49 percent of blacks in apparel earn 
below poverty in comparison to 6.09 percent 
of white women.
There are occupations in the durables manu­
facturing category where blacks have a higher 
representation than white women. Yet 23.87 per­
cent of black women in instruments manufactur­
ing earn below poverty wages in comparison to 
1.20 percent of white women workers.
In some occupations that hire a considerable 
number of women, blacks are underrepresented 
and those that are employed, work in the 
lowest jobs. Black women are employed at 
only half the rate of white women in printing 
and publishing and are not represented in 
the professional, technical, managerial and 
clerical jobs. 11.40 percent of blacks in 
this occupation, but only 4.16 percent of 
white women earn poverty wages.
In the health industry, a major source of jobs 
for women, employing 15 percent of white women 
and 20 percent of black women, strikingly dif­
ferent patterns by race are present. Black 
women are concentrated in non-hospital jobs 
(home based care, convalescent homes) where 
20 percent earn poverty wages. Blacks who 
are employed in hospitals, where they are

- 5 -



generally underrepresented, are LPN's and sub­
professional, maintenance, clerical and food 
service workers; 10.56 percent of them earn 
poverty wages. White women work in physicians' 
offices and in the higher, specialized occupa­
tions in hospitals. Only 1.45 percent earn at 
or below the poverty level.

* Some occupations where median women's wages
in 1981 were below poverty and where black women 
are overrepresented are: ironers/pressers;
laundry and dry cleaning; sewers/stitchers; 
dressmakers; produce handlers; welfare service 
aids; school monitors; child care workers, food 
counter workers,

5. Black women have moved over, but not up. The proportion 
of black women in household employment dropped dramati­

cally from 60 percent in 1940 to 6 percent in 1981. But this occupa­
tional diversification was essentially a shift from one set of 
stratified jobs to another. More than 70 percent of black women

low wage occupations in 1981. Black women increased their 
representation in traditionally female white collar jobs that 
whites were leaving. 29.5 percent of black women were in clerical 
jobs in 1981, in contrast to 8 percent in 1960. Black women are 
now overrepresented in a set of jobs in which they were under­
represented just 20 years ago but most of these provide only poor 
or near poor wages: file clerks, clerical assistants, typists,
health service workers, etc.

6. In 1982, the median annual income for fulltime black



women workers was 53.1 percent of white males' and 
89.5 percent of white females' median income. A comparison of 
the mean hourly wages of women below poverty, reveals that the 
earnings of poor black women are about 90 percent of white 
women's. Even in female-intensive occupations, black women earn 
less than white-males: 58 percent of male wages in clerical;
55 percent in sales; 56 percent in service work; 32 percent in 
private household employment. 59 percent of black women employed 
in service jobs are crowded and employed where women's fulltime, 
full-year pay is below the poverty level. 30 percent of black 
women operatives earn well below the poverty levels.

7. Both black and white low-income women workers have high 
rates of involuntary parttime employment. 43.29 per­

cent of low-income black women work parttime. The impact of in­
voluntary parttime work on hourly wages and income is sxibstantial 
and contributes to the high level of below poverty incomes. Some 
industries may deliberately organize work to avoid paying fringe 
benefits and pressures for advancement. Women who work involuntarily 
are concentrated in the least desirable female-intensive jobs. 
Involuntary parttime work contributes to stress. The 9-5 National 
Survey on Women and Stress reported:

While white women part-timers... are much less 
likely to describe their jobs as very stress­
ful, black women parttimers are more likely to 
describe part-time jobs as very stressful, sug­
gesting that they are 'involuntary' part-time 
workers who would work fulltime if they could.

- 7 -



8. Black and white low-income women have strikingly low 
rates of coverage in both employer-paid pensions and

group health. Of black women who head households and have children 
under 18, fewer than one-third are covered by pensions and only 
about 43 percent by group health. Lower coverage for black women 
exists in non-durables manufacturing, transportation, communications, 
utilities, retailing and in professionally related industry categories.

9. Black women workers feel threatened by many developments 
in the world of work: technological developments that

are projected to eliminate or sharply reduce entire categories of 
jobs; the restructuring of work that may downgrade and routinize 
certain kinds of office work; the transfer of jobs from inner cities 
to predominantly white rural areas or out of the country; reductions 
in force as governments cut budgets. Little attention has been 
given yet to what may become a major trend: the privatization of
public services as governments turn over the delivery of major 
systems, such as health care, to private for-profit agencies. The 
potential for the exploitation of low-income minority and female 
workers exists as these employers watch their "bottom lines" and 
seek to reduce their major cost, which is labor. The 9-5 survey 
mentioned above reported that the majority of black women inter­
viewed (and these were not all poor women) feel insecure in their 
present jobs.

10. Our major finding, clearly, is that racism and sexism have
created structures of discrimination that are mutually rein­

forcing. Strategies to enhance the economic status of working poor 
black women who are heads of household must recognize this inter­
locking relationship and address it.



THE BLACK WOMEN'S EMPLOYMENT PROGRAM 1985-1988 
The NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund (LDF) has 

launched a new program for working poor black women. This pro­
gram, that will address problems encountered in workplaces 
particularly by low-income black women who are heads of families, 
builds on LDF's extensive experience during the past two decades 
in combatting patterns of racial discrimination in employment. 
Black women have been among classes of complainants whom LDF 
has successfully represented in our employment discrimination 
suits filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
This new program brings added dimensions to our work. We will be 
consciously identifying, and seeking to remedy, discrimination 
that is compounded by the .intersection of racism and sexism in the 
world of work. We shall be exploring the feasibility of legal 
strategies that rely on authorities in addition to Title VII.
We are challenged to address some issues that will require LDF to 
acquire expertise in new areas.

Program Objectives
To move a significant number of black women out of 
female-intensive, dead-end and low-paying jobs into 
occupations that are nontraditional for black women 
and that offer prospects for job security;
To assist young black women in their efforts to 
avoid getting locked into low-paying jobs;
To improve the working conditions of black women 
who choose to stay in their current occupations.



by challenging inequities in wages, hazardous 
working environments, and the underrepresentation 
of working poor black women in fringe benefit 
programs.

Program Components
!• and other strategies to assure employment

in occupations where black women are excluded or 
underrepresented.
A. The Federal-Aid Highway Project

In 1973 Congress passed the Federal-Aid Highway Act 
which provides Federal funds to states for highway repair and 
construction. Under the Act, the Secretary of Transportation 
is required to receive assurances from each state that employment 
on such highway projects will be provided in a nondiscriminatory 
manner prior to approving the Federal grants to states. The 
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has also been authorized 
to oversee state*s actions in fulfilling those assurances, to 
establish procedures to effectuate the statute, and to maintain 

_ a vigorous monitoring and review process to ensure nondiscrimina­
tion and affirmative action in Federal and federally-assisted 
highway construction projects.

Southeast Women's Employment Coalition (SWEC), a 
multi-state network of women and women's employment programs 
that is based in Kentucky, reviewed the hiring records of state 
highway administrations and found that women were not being 
hired in their proportionate numbers to work in these federally- 
funded projects. Concerned about the employment prospects of 
women, SWEC determined that these highway jobs might provide

- 10 -



women, and particularly rural women, with opportunities for 
nontraditional employment and job skills that would enhance the 
overall job prospects for the women they serve. SWEC and other 
organizations concerned with the employment of women initiated 
complaints in 1980 against some states and private contractors 
with the Department of Labor's Office of Federal Contract Com­
pliance Programs (OFCCP) to enforce the affirmative action re­
quirements of Executive Order 11246 and with the FHWA against all 
states and the District of Columbia for the failure of both 
private highway construction contractors and state highway de­
partments of transportation to hire women. FHWA investigations 
of state highway departments are complete and its investigations 
of private contractors are to begin soon. The state investiga­
tions revealed glaring inequities in the hiring of women by 
state highway departments.

LDP is currently discussing a coordination-of 
resources with SWEC on behalf of black women who may benefit 
from the availability of public jobs heretofore not open to 
women within state departments of transportation and nontradi­
tional jobs within the construction crews of private contractors. 
Because the construction crews would be located throughout the 
states, rural women might more readily find employment in their 
own areas and might gain job skills (such as heavy equipment 
operators), that would prepare them for future employment. 
Strategies to open jobs in this area will probably include 
targeted litigation brought in conjunction with cooperating 
attorneys to ensure that nondiscrimination and affirmative 
action laws are enforced because SWEC has seen no indication

- 11 -



that FHWA will aggressively pursue a; remedy to the results of 
its investigations. LDF will pay particular attention to 
localities where women's groups are working for the employment 
rights of black women to ensure that black low-income women 
will be available to benefit from any gains that are won. LDF 
believes successful challenges in this area will create jobs 
and training for black women in nontraditional jobs in public 
and private employment throughout the fifty states and the 
District of Columbia.

B. The Southern Project
LDF will develop a litigation program to challenge 

patterns of discrimination in carefully selected occupations where 
black women are underrepresented or clustered in low-pay grades. 
Priority will be given to industries and job categories that are 
nontraditional for black women, that have a future, and are 
currently not subject to export out of the country.

We have initiated discussions with researchers at 
the Southern Growth Policies Board (SGPB) and will be strongly 
guided by their studies as we select areas for concentration 
in the South. For example, a 1984 report of SGPB's Committee 
on Southern Trends identified trends that would have special 
implications for us: the restructuring of the southern economy
around urban areas; the mismatch between job requirements and 
skills in the workforce; the reverse migration of blacks; and 
the impact of new global demands for wood and paper products.
SGPB has documented trends in the return of blacks to the South 
that have both a class and a sex dimension. There is a growing 
disparity between successful middle-class blacks and poor blacks

- 12 -



in the return migration. Many of the poor are single black 
women, heads of households, who are returning to rural areas 
and not to the urban centers where the jobs are.

SGPB predicts that the South could replace the 
Pacific Northwest as the woodbasket of the nation and become the 
major producer of wood and paper products. Data in the Wellesley 
report reveal that fewer than one percent of working black women 
were in lumber and paper occupations and that 23.4 percent of 
those employed in lumber earn below poverty wages. LDP has had 
a southern paper project since the late 1960’s. Strategies 
directed to jobs for black women would build on our successful 
litigation and community action projects that have attacked 
racial discrimination in the paper industry. Specific targets 
would be determined by the location of paper companies that are 
expanding in areas of large black concentrations, by the pres­
ence of black women who are encountering discrimination in their 
efforts to get good jobs in these firms and by the existence of 
support groups that will sustain these women throughout what 
could be protracted litigation.

C. The Licensure-Certification Project
LDP has been urged to document whether licensure 

and certification procedures effectively limit opportunities for 
blacks as professionals, entrepreneurs and employees in many 
service and technical occupations, and to develop strategies to 
eliminate those barriers that cannot survive legal challenges.

During meetings with officials of the Educational 
Testing Service (ETS) in Princeton and with faculty at the

- 13 -



Medical Center Campus of Miami-Dade Community College, LDF staff 
members were briefed on licensure and certification as a burgeon­
ing phenomenon in credentialing for professional and sub-pro­
fessional occupations. 800 occupations are licensed by public 
agencies at the Federal, state or local levels with wide dif­
ferences in the occupations regulated. Certification, the 
process by which nongovernmental —  and usually national pro­
fessional —  bodies qualify individuals for specific specialities, 
sets standards above the minimum. There is certification for 
23 medical, 8 dental, 9 osteopathic and 21 veterinary medicine 
specialties and 50 other health fields. We have been advised 
that many of the tests for licensure and certification have not 
been professionally developed and validated and are not reliable 
instruments for measuring competence and predicting performance.

Licensure and certification would be new areas for 
LDF but our attorneys have had extensive experience in testing.
In some of LDF's precedent-setting victories, courts have 
ordered public and private employers to develop fair and reliable 
testing mechanisms. LDF is currently defending affirmative 
action plans that employ alternatives to standardized tests as 
criteria for hiring and promotions. In view of our interest 
in allied health fields as opportunities for well-paying careers 
for black women from low-income families, we shall be especially 
concerned to document whether black women who have completed 
the requisite educational programs are not meeting credentialing 
requirements, and, if so, whether an adverse impact can be traced 
to testing procedures that have not been professionally validated.

- 14 -



II. Strategies to facilitate the shift within an occupa­
tional area from low-wage to better jobs for women.
A. The Health Care Industry Project

Almost 20 percent of black women work in health 
care. However, 20 percent of those working in hospitals and 11 
percent in non-hospital settings earn, below poverty wages.
Major changes in the health care delivery system, especially the 
burgeoning of for-profit chains, could force more black women 
into poverty-level jobs. On the other hand, there are excellent 
well-paying jobs in allied health fields and public community 
colleges are successfully training women from low-income families 
for these careers. As LDF develops this project, we anticipate 
that we will probably be involved in the following kinds of 
activities:

* monitoring, recruitment and admission 
procedures for premium allied health 
programs at public institutions;

* documentation of the adverse impact on 
blacks of licensing and certification 
procedures for allied health occupa­
tions and steps to eliminate these 
barriers;

* collaborative efforts with health 
care workers, employers, community 
colleges and local action groups to 
advise black women of opportunities
in these fields and create models that



demonstrate that black health care workers 
in low-wage jobs can be recruited, trained 
and employed in more productive occupa­
tions in this field.

B. Job restructuring
LDF has consulted with the Center for Women in 

Government about job restructuring in public employment. The 
Center has developed strategies that restructure civil service 
career ladders to provide for additional transitional training 
and future promotional opportunities for women who are employed 
in dead-end, low-paying jobs. This is a new area for LDF and 
additional consultation with Center staff and the development 
of appropriate targets (i.e. municipalities with large popula­
tions of black clericals) will be necessary. However, job re­
structuring may provide considerable career opportunities for 
low-pay clerical and service jobs that are disproportionately 
filled by women.

Ill. Strategies to attack patterns of discrimination by 
race and sex in training programs.
For almost a decade LDF has sponsored national, state 

and community projects to challenge patterns of sex and race 
discrimination in federally-funded vocational education. Our 
plan with respect to the women's program is to target our efforts 
in training to specific occupations and/or industries that we 
identify as sources of good, stable, well-paying jobs. We shall 
continue, of course, to join with other organizations in the 
monitoring at the national level of the Jobs Partnership Train-

- 16 -



- l y ­
ing Act (JTPA) and other Federal training programs. However, 
our efforts will be concentrated in states and industries that 
we will select for our nontraditional employment projects.

As we implement the employment litigation strategy 
for nontraditional jobs discussed above, our work in vocational 
education for minorities and girls will be refocused on particular 
southern states where occupational growth is projected, so 
that fully qualified young black women will be available to 
fill opening jobs. LDF will identify action groups —  particular­
ly those composed of low-income black women —  and develop with 
them some strategies to correct inequities in vocational education 
programs. To support these local community action groups:

* LDF will contact sex equity coordinators in 
key states to gather race and sex data for 
the current enrollment in secondary and post­
secondary vocational programs;

* LDF will provide analyses of projected occupa­
tional demands and labor force supply for a 
targeted industry within a state or region;

* LDF will examine vocational education and 
JTPA state plans to identify resources that 
are currently available for training in the 
skills projected for future jobs.

It is imperative that vocational education programs 
provide black girls with marketable skills and that jobs be 
available for those girls to fill. It is for this reason that 
LDF is combining the strategies to expand job opportunities with 
those that address the quality of the black female labor force.



83 percent of families headed by black women under 
24 years of age are poor. Young black women have extremely high 
unemployment rates. In 1982, 45.3 percent of black women 18-19 
years of age, and 26.8 percent of black women ages 20-24 were 
unemployed. Prevention of life-long poverty must begin with 
the young, "'■rargeting training resources to those young people 
who will experience future structural unemployment, underemploy­
ment, inadequate earnings and thus labor-market economic hardship 
is an important long-term solution."

Not Working: Pnskilled Youth and Displaced Adults
A Working Paper from the Ford Foundation, 1983

- 18 -

IV. Strategies to improve working conditions of black women 
in low-wage jobs.
Many black women do not choose to leave their current 

occupations, often because they lack the mobility or options to 
move. For them, improving their conditions of employment would be 
most beneficial. LDF has been urged to get involved in three 
areas. Explorations are currently underway but we are not at this 
time in a position to state what the women's program would speci­
fically do in these areas:

A. Challenging patterns of race and sex-based 
wage discrimination.
The term "comparable worth" has raised many hackles 

but the New York Times calling it "one reasonable, if experimental 
approach to right those wrongs" of disparities in pay, stated 
that proving discrimination is a "heavy burden for women, but 
not an insurmountable one."



About one-third of the states have already under­
taken pay equity/job evaluation studies; many of them that do 
not undertake remedial action might be vulnerable to litigation.
Black women welfare workers in the Illinois and Cook County 
Public Aid Departments recently won a $15 million back pay award 
in a suit challenging wage discrimination. Inasmuch as black 
women are 27.9 percent of welfare service aides and received in 
1982 a median salary that was at the poverty level, assuring pay 
equity for such workers in other states would be one way to 
enhance the economic status of black women who choose to remain 
in their present occupations. Most of the emphasis at the present 
time is on government as an employer. With 40 percent of black 
women at all income levels in public employment, justice for a 
significant number of them might be an attainable goal,

B. Administrative complaints to Federal and state agencies 
challenging occupational health hazards.
LDF will be engaged with issues, legal authorities 

and compliance agencies with which we have not been involved in 
the past. One focus might be office work, inasmuch as 30 percent 
of all black women are in clerical work. Violations of health 
and safety standards are increasingly being charged and organiza­
tions of clerical workers have made this one of their priority issues.

C. Addressing the underrepresentation of low-income 
black women in fringe benefit programs.
LDF will work with consultants to determine particular 

job categories or industries that do not provide adequate or 
affordable medical and/or pension fringe benefits to low-paid 
black female employees. LDF will also work with experts in the

_ 19 -



field of benefit programs to devise corrective strategies. These 
strategies might include active support for national health 
care legislation, medical and/or retirement plans for groups or 
associations of employees that are modeled after the private plans 
that supplement Medicare insurance, or other creative and innova­
tive means of providing medical and retirement benefits to working 
poor black women at a cost that encourages hheir use.

- 20 -

Community Action Projects

During the first year, LDF will develop three community action 
projects. A local group will be identified (or established) to 
pursue one or more of the above objectives. To be explored:
1. In view of reports that some of the most far-reaching changes 

in health care delivery systems are occurring in California, 
and also in view of LDF's long-standing involvement with
the community college system there, and the fact that our 
health consultant is based in the state, we will explore the 
feasibility of a project in California that will address some 
aspects of the employment of black women in allied health 
fields,

2. A southern project, designed in close consultation with 
researchers at the Memphis State University Women's Center 
and the Southern Growth Policies Board.

3. A northern urban project, possibly in Philadelphia because 
of the number of organizations concerned with low-income 
black women in that city.



Program Development 1984-1985
On April 28, 1984, LDF's Board of Directors approved for 

implementation a new program to address problems encountered by 
working poor black women. It was launched with a Working Party 
that was co-sponsored by the Johnson Foundation at its Wingspread 
Conference Center on May 21-23, 1984, Representatives of nation­
al and regional organizations, social scientists, attorneys and 
women trade unionists were among the members of the Working Party 
who made recommendations to LDP concerning critical issues, 
priorities for the new program and strategies that might effectively 
enable black working women to escape poverty. The report is 
attached.

Since July 1984 we have been in. the "Start-up-Phase" that 
has been funded with a special grant from the Ford Foundation.
During this period we have accomplished the following; We have 
engaged two consultants to undertake investigations in certain 
specified areas and to produce background papers for us. Sylvia 
Drew Ivie, director of the National Health Law Project in Los 
Angeles, California, is our consultant on the health delivery 
system as an employer. Arkie Byrd, an attorney in Little Rock, 
Arkansas, has been commissioned to Identify organizations of 
low-income women and attorneys who might become part of our net­
work in the South and to compile information on employment 
projections, particularly'in south-central states.

Charlotte Rutherford has been appointed program director.
Ms. Rutherford is a graduate of Howard University Law School and 
received her master's degree from the Georgetown University Law 
Center this year.

- 21 -



This has also been a period for extensive consultation with 
a range of persons and organizational representatives. They have 
included

National Coirariittee on Pay Equity 
National Institute for Women of Color 
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence 
NOW Legal Defense and Education Fund - Project on 

Equal Education Rights CPEER)
Women's Equity Action League 
Women's Legal Defense Fund
Center for Women in Government, State University 

of New York at Albany 
National Women's Law Center 
Center for National Policy Review 
Wider Opportunities for Women 
Leadership Conference on Civil Rights - 

Employment Task Force 
Southeast Women's Employment Coalition Women and JPTA Coalition
Center for Research on Women, Memphis State University 
Arkie Byrd, Esq., Mays and Crutcher, P.A.,

Little Rock, Arkansas
Sylvia Drew Ivie, Director-Counsel, National Health 

Law Program, Inc., Los Angeles, California 
Medical Center Campus, Miami-Dade Community College

- 22 -



Staff and Budget
- 23 -

Staff:
New York: Program Director, Charlotte Rutherford

One fulltime attorney tequivalenti 
Paralegal, to be hired 

Washington: Phyllis McClure (15%)
Secretarial Services 
Fringe Benefits 

Staff Travel
Consultants; consultations
National Program Expenses (duplication, etc.)
Community Projects 3 @ $30,000 
Administration and Overhead

TOTAL

$ 30,000
45.000
12.000
5.000 

18,000 
2 2 , 0 0 0  

10,000 
2 0 , 0 0 0

5.000
90.000
43.000 

$300,000



/^'C-t..̂ ^-'-^ ^-1 ’̂ S fr* -̂ '•'

Z^^ X  ̂ ' x> /  6a*5K.«.v^

t "