SONY BMG AXES BLACKS ONLY: Label found to have discriminated in layoffs.
(January 10, 2007)
*Sony BMG, which is home to artists like Beyonce and Christina Aguilera, was recently found to have discriminated against its Black employees in its Manhattan office during layoffs in 2004.
The company went through a merger and restructuring in the summer of 2004 and the New York office of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) found the company guilty of discrimination against its Black employees. The EEOC found that the six Blacks in its Manhattan office were issued pink slips, but none of their white counterparts. The only black worker that remained was a mail clerk. Of the six Blacks fired, three accepted severance packages and three were asked to leave "involuntarily." None of eight whites and one Asian at the office were given the ax.
This ruling gives former field marketing rep Tamieka Blair, 32, the right to sue Sony BMG, saying she "was the victim of race discrimination."
Blair, who introduced new releases to Long Island music stores, told The New York Post she loved her $31,000-a-year job. She went on to explain that she initially accepted her layoff after a boss told her "it was just a numbers game." But once the workers who were fired compared notes with each other, "we realized it was all the black people," she said.
Sony BMG maintains that it based its layoff decisions on job performance, but the EEOC said the company had "no documented procedure for determining who the best players were," and "lacked performance standards."
Ms. Blair, via lawyer Mitchell Carlinsky, will file suit this week in Brooklyn federal court holding the company accountable.
Sa ad this incident is I'm not totally sure what all the hubub is about. After all, one of the many side effects of cultural co-option is killing off the gatekeepers of the culture. As black music became Urban music became Pop music, the "need" for black musicians and black music executives has dwindled in the minds of those who never truly respected either.
After all, if i can duplicate what you do, what do i need to invest comparable resources in you for? It's what we call "redunancies" and efficiencies in the business world.
COnsider:
If Christina can do a good Whitney impression, why do i need whitney, even in her prime? She'll never crossover they way Christina has/does. So... Why do i need Usher (remember him?) or Ne-Yo anymore when Robin Thicke and Justin TImberlake can sell way more with way less effort on my end? BB King when Eric Clapton can do a reasonably good impression? Why do i need George Clinton when everybody from the Chili Peppers to Phish to Dave matthews band is funky? Why deal with Winton or Brandford or Josh Redman or INSERT ARTIST HERE when Dianna Krall and Kenny G and Dave Koz, INSERT ARTIST THERE can give me their audience-plus? What do i need Afrikaa Bam or Grandmasterflash or DJ Spooky or Dr. Dre even when QBert or DJ Shadow or Scott Storch can give me a bigger ROI?
It's just a numbers and color game. It's just a base mentality at work that's always been there unfortunately.
It'll get nastier before it ever gets sweet again.
buckle up, kids--let the good times roll.
