Inequality in the Military: An Examination of Promotion Time for Black and White Enlisted Men

Abstract

Military sociologists have relied on a theory which is grounded in the universalistic standard argument to explain black inequality in the Army. This argument, which is a component part of the institutional racism perspective, argues that blacks do not do as well as whites in the Army because of their failure to do well on universalistic criteria such as civilian education or the Armed Forces Qualification Test. Taking promotion time as a measure of inequality, this paper presents data which suggest that universalistic criteria are not sufficient to explain black inequality vis-a-vis promotion time. When black and white enlisted men are matched on key universalistic criteria (civilian education, Armed Forces Qualification Test and occupation type), blacks consistently take more time to make grade than whites. The findings suggest the salience of the notion of ascription: when ascription is based on race, it becomes a component part of racism. Thus, one unavoidably is led by the data in this paper to conclude that the black enlisted man is subject to inequality, which is not the result of failure to meet universalistic criteria but, rather, a result of the racist actions of real-life people.