Speech

For Release on Delivery Thursday, July 11, 1968 1°:00 a.m., P.D.T. 1:°0 P.m., E.D.T. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IN BANKING: AN URBAN PERSPECTIVE Remarks By Andrew F. Brimmer Member Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System At an Equal Employment Opportunity Conference Sponsored Jointly By U. S. Treasury Department, American Bankers Association,and California Bankers Association International Hotel Los Angeles July 11, 1968 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY IN BANKING: AN URBAN PERSPECTIVE By Andrew F. Brimmer* Even a cursory review leaves one impressed with the rapid strides which banks are making to expand job opportunities for minority groups, 'his is as true in California as in the rest of the nation. Progress is Particularly striking in the large banks in urban areas, but smaller institu- tions are also sharing in the movement. Moreover, a number of organizations national, regional and local -- are spearheading equal opportunity programs that show considerable promise. Some have already achieved noticeable results. All of us who are interested in the further development of a vigorous and efficient banking system must applaud these efforts. At the same time, however, I am personally troubled by the limited scope of some of the bank programs aimed at recruitment of minority groups. With very few exceptions, the programs at which I have looked are focused almost exclusively on employment and training of minority group employees in substantially greater numbers than in the past. Since these steps alone represent giant strides for many banks, °ne might be inclined to ask what else is required or could be expected. The answer is: a much greater effort to build bridges to those urban communities where most minority groups live. To build such bridges, banks should not only offer expanding job opportunities. They should also look carefully at their lending policies to insure that such policies do not ^Member, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. I am indebted to Miss Mary Ann Graves of the Board's staff for assistance in the preparation of these remarks. -2- arbitrarily exclude members of minority groups from consideration as borrowers. In addition, the banks should measure the distances between themselves and the residents of these communities: is the bank represented m the organizations devoted to community improvement -- and is the community represented on the boards and the councils of the bank? In my personal judgment, a bank that is fully committed to the expansion of equal opportunity should assure itself that all of its policies -- employment, lending and community participation -- are shaped with imagination and reinforce each other. Unfortunately, few of the bank programs developed so f to reach into our urban communities meet these criteria. I shall ar Return to this theme below. In the meantime, the main points of these remarks can be summarized briefly: The record of minority group employment in banks in California appears to be mixed, compared with the country as a whole. For Spanish-Americans and Orientals, the California experience seems to be much better, but for Negroes it seems to be only slightly better, than in the country as a whole. In the last year or so, however, banks in California have made noticeable strides in expanding employment for minority groups. For example, such groups accounted for more than half of the net increase in employment in eight large California banks between the spring of 1967 and the spring of 1968. In the country at large, a number of organizations have programs underway that show considerable promise. The efforts of the American Bankers Association and Plans for Progress -- along with those in several cities -- are especially worthy of comment. Contacts with banks by members of minority groups are proportionately much more infrequent than by members of the population generally. Much more vigorous efforts need to be made by banks to reach minority group commu- nities in urban areas. Otherwise, efforts to recruit employees among these groups are likely to yield only indifferent results. Minority Group Employment in Banking In speaking of equal opportunity for minority groups, most observers have in mind Negroes, Spanish Americans (Puerto Ricans and Mexican Americans), Orientals and American Indians. Among these, statistical information on Negroes is both most readily available and the most clearly defined. The U. S. Bureau of the Census estimates that the Negro population was 21.6 million in March, 1967; it was 18.8 million at the time of the 1960 census. No recent Census Bureau estimates are available for other minority groups. In 1960, there were about 3.7 million Mexican Americans; 890 thousand Puerto Ricans; 520 thousand Indians; 460 thousand Japanese; 240 thousand Chinese, and 175 thousand Filipinos. Thus, in I960 Negroes represented roughly 78 per cent of the minority groups defined above. Moreover, Negroes are the only minority group that is widely distributed throughout the country, while the others are highly concentrated Puerto Ricans in New York, Mexican Americans in California and the Southwest, and Orientals in Hawaii and on the West Coast. Thus, much of the following analysis of national experience with expanding job opportunities for minority groups is focused primarily on employment of Negroes in banking. The California experience, however, must necessarily focus on Mexican Americans and Orientals as well. The 1960 Census is also the only comprehensive source of infor- roation on employment patterns among minority groups. Since almost a decade has elasped since that census was taken, one must rely on rough estimates from a variety of sources. To bridge this gap, I recently asked the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to prepare a special tabulation °f statistics reported to the Commission under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. So far, data are available for 1966 only; these cover reports submitted in the spring of that year as required of all Private employers with 100 or more employees and of holders of Federal government contracts of $50,000 or more with 50 or more employees. Because of these minimum size limitations, the statistical coverage in terms of the number of firms was rather narrow in the banking sector (along with many other industries). However, the coverage was quite adequate in terms of the number of employees. This was especially true in banking where employment is heavily concentrated in large establishments.— Using the EEOC data for Negroes as indicative of the situation minority groups generally, the picture shown in Table 1 emerges for banking and finance in 1966. Thus, Negroes represented just under 4-1/2 per cent of total employment in banking. This proportion was slightly more than one-half their share of all private industry jobs (8 per cent) reported in the EEOC However, the ratio of Negro to total employment in banking was somewhat higher than in other major financial sectors. In general, the EEOC data show that the greater the proportion of white collar to total employment in American industry, the smaller is the incidence of participation by JY Reports for both 1967 and 1968 are still being processed by EEOC. L'he 1967 results may be available by late summer, but 1968 results may n°t be available until late this fall. 2/ For example, the EEOC data for 1966 covered 1,711 of the 13,800 hanking institutions in the country and accounted for 509 thousand of the 800 thousand employees in the industry. However, the coverage by size of firm was as follows: under 100 employees, 8 per cent; 100-250 employees, 93 per cent; 250-500 employees, 88 per cent; over 500 employees 98 Per cent. -5- Table 1. Employment Pattern Among Negroes in Banking and Finance Spring, 1966 Selected Industries Negro Employment Percentage of as per cent of Firms with Total Employment No Negro Employees All Industry 8.2 47.1 Banking and Finance 1.9 - 11.8 31.9 - 77.8 Banking 4.4 31.9 Insurance 3.3 77.8 Securities Dealers/Exchanges 2.4 75.5 Credit Agencies 2.4 71.3 Real Estate 11.8 39.0 Other Finance Insurance & Real Estate 1.9 68.0 Source: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Negroes. About one-third of the banks covered in the EEOC reports had no Negro employees, compared with almost one-half of all firms reporting. Undoubtedly, the fact that bank coverage was restricted primarily to large institutions accounts for the high proportion of banks reporting Negroes °n their payroll. jilSEloyment Patterns in California In California, the employment pattern of minority groups in bank- ing is quite mixed. For example, Spanish Americans account for a somewhat larger proportion of the total employment in San Francisco than in New York. For Negroes the reverse was true. The percentage distributions for total and white collar employment were roughly as shown in Table 2 in 1966. -6- Table 2. Employment of Negroes and Spanish Americans in Banking, San Francisco and New York, Spring, 1966 (Percentage distribution) San Francisco New York City White White Total Collar Total Collar Negroes All industry 8.0 3.0 10.0 5.7 Banking 4.9 4.6 6.5 6.3 Spanish Americans All industry 6.7 2.9 5.7 2.6 Banking 6.7 6.4 4.7 4.7 Source: Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Thus, in California, the representation of Spanish Americans in banking is roughly the same as their representation in industry generally. Among Negroes, the incidence of employment in banking in California is considerably below their participation in all industry. In New York City, the participation rate for Spanish Americans in banking falls short of the all industry rate, but the differential is much less than that' for Negroes. Negroes and Spanish Americans -- in both San Francisco and New York -- hold a relatively larger proportion of white collar jobs in banking than they in industry generally. Banks in California -- as in the rest of the nation -- are making vigorous efforts to broaden further the range of employment opportunities -7- minority groups. Just how rapidly the situation is changing in California can be seen in Table 3, showing the pattern of minority group emPloyment in eight large commercial banks in 1967 and 1968. These data are summaries of the banks' EEOC reports submitted in the spring of both years. it will be noted that minority groups -- which represented about one-eighth of the banks' total labor force in 1967 -- accounted for more than one-half of the increase in employment between the two years. The somewhat smaller participation rates for Negroes and Spanish Americans in these eight banks in 1967, compared with the participation rates in San Francisco in 1966, probably can be traced to the fact that the figures lri Table 3 cover the banks' state-wide employment levels while minority groups are heavily concentrated in large urban areas. (In fact, on a state- wide basis in California, Negroes constituted only 3.8 per cent of total emPloyment in banks reported in the 1966 EEOC data, compared with 4.4 per cent for the country as a whole.) But, reflecting the rapid increase in employ- ment in banking in California during the last year, minority groups' share of total employment in the eight banks rose to just over 15 per cent. Other banks in the state undoubtedly also greatly expanded job opportunities for members of such groups over the same period. -fe™ .Programs to Promote Equal Opportunity in Banking As I mentioned above, a number of organized efforts are going forward to enhance wider opportunities for minority groups in the banking industry. Perhaps the most broadly based is the effort launched by the American Bankers Association (ABA) earlier this year. In April, the ABA -8- Table 3. Employment of Minority Groups in Eight Large Commercial Banks in California, Spring, 1967 and 1968 Category of 1967 1968 Change: 1967-68 Employment Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent of total of total of total Minority Groups 9,545 12.6 12,211 15., 1 2,666 53.. 4 Negro 2,918 3.8 3,674 4.. 5 756 15,. 1 Spanish-American 4,243 5.6 5,736 7.. 1 1,493 29.. 9 Oriental 2,342 3.1 2,750 3.. 4 408 8.. 2 0ther Employees 66,347 87.4 68,676 84., 9 2,329 46., 6 i'otal Employment 75,892 100.0 80,887 100., 0 4,995 100.. 0 Source: Summary of EEOC Reports. formed a 45-member Bankers Committee on Urban Affairs. The Committee ^embers (drawn from senior bank management) represent a wide geographic cr°ss section of the banking industry. The Committee's creation is a reflection of the ABA's general concern with -- and involvement in -- the basic difficulties confronting the nation's cities. Initially the Committee will concentrate its efforts in three principal areas: Housing for low and middle-income persons. - Equal employment opportunity for disadvantaged persons. Business assistance in ghetto areas. -9- With regard to equal employment, the Committee in early June adopted a policy statement urging the banking industry to use all the resources at its command to insure equal employment opportunities for members of disadvantaged groups. To help implement this policy, a special task force on urban employment opportunities has been created; it is work- ing with the American Institute of Banking and the ABA's Personnel Adminis- tration and Management Development Committee. The aim is to fashion a concrete program through which the banking industry as a whole can promote employment opportunities. The staff expects to present the program to the Committee on Urban Affairs in the near future. In the meantime, a number of local chapters of the American Institute of Banking (AIB) have probably gone farther than any other bank- ing industry group to launch programs to enhance employment opportunities f°r minority groups. In New York City, 34 banking and financial institutions have joined, in collaboration with the local chapter of AIB, in a consortium arrangement to employ and train over 700 ghetto residents for careers in banking over the next year. The program is aimed primarily at Negro and Puerto Rican school dropouts who have been unemployed or under- employed. While the program has an early goal of preparing the participants to perform junior clerical and business machine operational tasks at the institutions, its long-run objective is to equip them to qualify for high school equivalency degrees. For many, this means intensive work in remedial education as well as instruction in banking fundamentals and on-the-job training in different aspects of bank operations. But for those who complete the year-long program, opportunities will exist for further training in -10- rogular AIB courses. Thus, for them avenues will be opened to meaningful careers in banking beyond the beginning level jobs in banks (for which most °f the trainees could not have qualified without the special efforts the banks are making). I am especially pleased that the Federal Reserve Bank of New York ls Prominent among the 34 institutions participating in the program. In ocher cities around the country (particularly in Boston and Wichita, Kansas), AIB chapters are pioneering in the development of equal opportunity programs. The paths these leaders are breaking can -- and should -- be followed by still other AIB chapters which so far have not developed projects of their own. Through Plans for Progress, some 34 banks are striving to expand job horizons for minority groups. These institutions -- along with all °ther companies participating in this voluntary private industry effort -- have signed a formal agreement with the Vice President pledging to under- take programs of affirmative action to insure equality of employment °Pportunity. The first bank joined Plans for Progress in March, 1964, and by the end of 1966, a total of nine had enrolled. Five of these nine were California institutions. In May, 1967, Vice President Humphrey invited representatives of the banking community to a meeting in Washington, D. C., to explore ways of increasing commercial banks' participation in the Plans for Progress Pr°gram. Reflecting that effort, another 24 banks had enrolled by the end °f June this year. Plans for Progress reports that the banks participating in its Program employ members of minority groups in considerably larger proportions -11- than do other banks. For example, according to their estimates, in the spring of 1966, minority groups constituted 12.9 per cent of the total work force in its member institutions, compared with 7.2 per cent for banks which were not members. In the area of white collar employment, the ratios were 12.7 per cent for Plans for Progress banks and 5.7 per cent for other institutions. A number of banks across the country are participating fully the program of the National Alliance of Businessmen in pledging a Proportionate number of new job opportunities for disadvantaged persons. Some of these are being supported by Federal funds for training subsidies increased program expenditures. However, in many cases, banks are assuming the increased financial obligation without Federal assistance. Throughout the nation, individual banks are mounting or already have underway vigorous programs to expand job opportunities for minority groups. Such individual bank programs have attracted considerable notice ln Now York, Philadelphia, and Chicago. This is also true of several banks California. •5£a£hiii£ Beyond Equal Employment Opportunity As I mentioned at the outset, all these efforts to expand employ- ment opportunities in banking are to be applauded, because they are obviously helping greatly to ease one of our most pressing urban difficulties -- the Problem of high unemployment rates among minority groups. On the other hand, is also necessary for the banks to reach beyond the development of employment programs if they are to make a truly significant contribution to -12- urban rehabilitation. Even when one examines the content of some of the employment Programs now unfolding, it is difficult to escape the impression that many of them are being fashioned without much feeling for the environ- ments in which recruitment is to take place. In my judgment, we must constantly remind ourselves that the typical resident of our urban ghettos has little -- if anything -- to do with banks. Just how relatively little contact many minority groups have with banks was amply illustrated in the household survey conducted in 1966 by The Opinion Research Corporation for the Foundation for Commercial Banks.1/ - One question focused on the disposition of the main wage earner's pay or income check. The responses of families, by color, were as follows (percentage of respondents): White Nonwhite Entire check deposited 26 7 Part of check deposited 38 16 Entire check cashed 41 72 Check cashed in bank 20 27 Check 65 19 Cash 37 70 Money order 10 21 In these summaries, percentages do not necessarily add to 100 because of overlapping of some responses among different categories. -13- Questions were also included on the use of checking accounts and other bank services: White Nonwhite Have regular and/or special checking account 71 23 Have regular checking account 61 20 Have special checking account 16 4 Use one or more savings services 60 30 The central conclusion that stands out in these responses is that minority groups -- of whom nonwhites constitute the vast majority — are quite distant from banks. Since a typical member of such groups has little business contact with banks, and is likely to know few -- if any — persons who actually work in banks, it probably seldom occurs to him to think of banks in terms of a place in which to work. If this distance between banks and minority groups is to be bridged, much of the initiative must come from banks. Again, in my judgment, tbis initiative should include a review of banks' lending policies with respect to minority groups as well as an expansion of their participation community affairs. The need for many banks to review their lending policies is clearly demonstrated by the way in which many of them have managed their share of tbe student guaranteed loan program established by the Higher Education Act 1965. According to a study of the program recently made by the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, the program works to the disadvantage of college students in ghetto families. This unintended effect (and perhaps unconscious result from many bankers' point of view) comes about primarily because of a shortage of loanable funds. In order to ration such funds, many banks -14- restrict such loans to potential borrowers with previous deposit or customer relations with the institution. They also tend to give preference to borrowers in the banks' immediate service area. Both of these criteria tend to favor the more affluent middle class and suburban families — and t" r\ put college students who live in the ghetto to a considerable disadvantage In the competition for educational loans. The criteria used by many banks to appraise loan applications submitted by minority group businessmen have a similar effect. Because th e operations of these entrepreneurs are usually small, under-capitalized, and can exhibit a record of only indifferent performance, they ordinarily cannot qualify for loans under normal terms. Yet, the drive for business ownership in the ghetto is strong, and banks are increasingly identified as a source of hope — or frustration or both. Recognizing this situation, banks around the country are devising special screening techniques and sPccialied loan programs which are beginning to meet some of these loan requests.2 Finally, numerous banks are also seeking new avenues of cooperation Wlt"h minority groups in our central cities. In addition to broadening their Participation in community projects, some banks are inviting minority group Members to join their boards or directors or to sit on advisory boards for ^ranches located in areas populated primarily by minority groups. This aPProach appears to be especially appealing to minority groups in those communities where it has been tried. In states (such as California) where ^ny of the banks have a large network of branches, such representation may -15- be a promising vehicle to enable the banks to reach out to minority groups far more effectively than simply expanding employment opportunities more rapidly — although the latter is obviously a substantial contribution even when taken alone.

Andrew F. Brimmer (1968, July 10). Speech. Speeches, Federal Reserve. https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/speech_19680711_brimmer

@misc{wtfs_speech_19680711_brimmer,
  author = {Andrew F. Brimmer},
  title = {Speech},
  year = {1968},
  month = {Jul},
  howpublished = {Speeches, Federal Reserve},
  url = {https://whenthefedspeaks.com/doc/speech_19680711_brimmer},
  note = {Retrieved via When the Fed Speaks corpus}
}