13.2 Discrimination in Sports Flashcards
What was Gary Becker’s basic argument about discrimination in a competitive market?
Becker said that in a fully competitive labor market, discrimination imposes extra costs on the discriminating firm (e.g., hiring or paying less-productive favored workers over more-productive disfavored workers). Because they operate at a cost disadvantage, discriminators would eventually lose out to firms that do not discriminate. Thus, over time, competition should drive discrimination out—assuming there are no market imperfections or other barriers.
Why did Becker believe a discriminator faces higher costs?
A firm that refuses to hire qualified workers from a disfavored group—or forces them to accept lower pay—reduces its own talent pool and/or pays extra to retain less productive (favored) workers. This inefficient choice leads to lower profits or higher labor costs compared to a non-discriminating competitor. In a perfectly competitive market with many firms, those more efficient (nondiscriminatory) rivals can outperform or outbid discriminators in the long run.
How did Becker’s theory apply to Major League Baseball’s experience with segregation?
Pre-integration, there were talented Black players available at lower wages due to discrimination in the Negro Leagues. A forward-thinking owner (Branch Rickey, for instance) could sign talented Black players cheaply, thereby gaining a competitive advantage. Indeed, once Jackie Robinson demonstrated high productivity, other teams slowly followed suit—those that resisted paid the “cost” of discrimination in the form of weaker rosters and lost revenue.
If Becker’s theory says discrimination is costly, why might it still persist in sports?
Several factors can slow or prevent competition from eliminating discrimination:
Consumer Tastes: Fan bias can reward owners who avoid certain players.
Coworker/Teammate Bias: A team might have to pay more to appease prejudiced players.
Monopoly or Market Power: If a league or team faces little competition, it can “afford” discrimination without going out of business.
Institutional Barriers: Powerful commissioners (like Judge Landis in baseball) or rules can block nondiscriminatory hires. Lack of Full Information: Statistical (or perceived) discrimination can persist if teams incorrectly judge one group’s productivity.
Why did Gary Becker argue discrimination by employees (coworkers) could be particularly harmful?
If white players refuse to play alongside certain teammates—or demand higher wages to do so—this raises the firm’s labor costs if it does integrate. Consequently, even an unbiased owner might choose segregation to avoid extra costs caused by coworker bias, effectively entrenching discrimination.
How does baseball’s pre-1947 segregation illustrate coworker discrimination?
Star white players threatened to strike or refused to play when Black players appeared. Team owners feared losing gate revenue if white teammates (or prejudiced fans) boycotted the games. This raised the economic “price” of hiring Black players, thus reinforcing the color line for decades—despite the athletic and profit benefits of integration.
What are some reasons beyond Becker’s model that discrimination might remain in sports today?
Lock-in of Old Regimes: It may take time for older executives or owners (who grew up with biases) to retire, so structural change can be slow.
Network Effects/Old Boys’ Clubs: Promotion and hiring can favor in-group networks, excluding minorities.
**Legacy Effects: **Historical discrimination influences who invests in skill development (for example, fewer role models or fewer resources for certain groups).
Statistical Discrimination: If managers assume certain groups are “less coachable” or “less talented,” individuals from that group may be overlooked or undervalued.
Give an example of how researchers test for post-integration discrimination in baseball.
They run regression analyses on salaries or playing time, including performance measures like batting average, home runs, etc. Then they see if a race or ethnicity variable remains significant after controlling for performance. A negative coefficient on race or group dummy implies players of that group are paid less or used less than equally performing peers—often viewed as discrimination.
What did historical studies generally find about salary discrimination post-integration in MLB?
Early studies (1970s–90s) showed little or no pay discrimination once performance was properly accounted for, especially for star players. Some found that fans (customer discrimination) might still show biases (e.g., All-Star voting, collectible card prices). Other studies identified occasional evidence of bench player or positional discrimination, but large-sample results often pointed to a trend toward equality over time.
Why might consumer (fan) discrimination persist even if owners want the best players?
Owners can’t always control fan preferences. If fans refuse to attend or purchase merchandise from a diverse team, it reduces that team’s revenue potential. In principle, teams that don’t cater to bias might still earn higher profits because they field better players. However, if the majority of fans harbor prejudice (especially in certain markets), integration could be less profitable in the short run—leading to delayed or incomplete diversity.
How did Jackie Robinson’s success ultimately confirm parts of Becker’s theory?
Competitive Edge: Signing talented Black players gave the Brooklyn Dodgers an on-field advantage.
Profit Incentives: More wins boosted attendance revenue, showing that many fans were happy to watch integrated teams—blunting the effect of a smaller subset of prejudiced customers.
Cascading Effect: Rival clubs recognized the economic advantage and followed suit, gradually eroding the color barrier.
If Becker’s model is “hopeful,” what are some deeper reasons discrimination might still persist, even in sports?
Institutional Lock-ins: Powerful gatekeepers (commissioners, league rules, or owners with deep-seated biases) can stall progress.
**Incomplete Competition: **If only a few owners truly push for integration, they can be overruled in a cartel-like league structure.
**Long-run Cultural Change: **Social norms and stereotypes take time to erode. So even if a purely “rational” economic actor sees the benefits of integration, social pressures or ingrained biases can slow adoption.
**Historical Legacies: **Past discrimination shapes today’s talent pipelines, meaning disadvantaged groups may still have lower representation among top talent.
