Editorial Board:

Editor:
George H. Conklin,
 North Carolina
 Central University

Board:
Bob Davis,
 North Carolina
 Agricultural and
 Technical State
 University

Richard Dixon,
 UNC-Wilmington

Ken Land,
 Duke University

Miles Simpson,
 North Carolina
 Central University

Ron Wimberley,
 N.C. State University

Robert Wortham,
 North Carolina
 Central University
    

® 
Volume 3, Number 2
Fall 2005

    Hispanics are the fastest growing minority group in the United States due to heavy immigration and high fertility rates (U.S. Census Bureau 2001a). Due to these trends, national projections indicate that by 2006, Hispanics will surpass blacks as the largest non-white segment of the American workforce (Fullerton 1997). Mexican immigrants are a significant proportion of this growing pool of Hispanic/Latino workers (U.S. Census Bureau 2001b) and prior to the early 1990s, Mexican migration to the United States was largely concentrated in several southwestern states (Durand, Massey and  Charvet 2000). However, since the mid 1990s, Mexican immigrants have increasingly been choosing new destination sites such as North Carolina (Frey 1998). During the last decade, North Carolina experienced substantial growth in its Hispanic/Latino population (U.S. Census Bureau 2001b). Specifically, in eastern North Carolina, the Hispanic/Latino population grew much faster over the last decade than all other groups (Simpson et al. 1999). The changes brought about by this shift in population are likely to have affected many facets of life, including employment conditions. However, because of the rapid growth in the Hispanic/Latino population in this area, little is known about employers’ assessment of these new workers. This paper is a descriptive study focusing on nonagricultural employers’ attitudes and behaviors toward Hispanic/Latino immigrants as a new source of labor in eastern North Carolina. Employers’ preferences for workers will certainly play a key role in determining the successful economic adaptation of Hispanic/Latino immigrants in this new destination site.

Migration Trends

    Prior to early 1990s, Mexican migration to the United States was largely concentrated in the southwestern states of California, Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona (Durand et al. 2000). However, after the full implementation of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) which provided amnesty and legalized a substantial number of Mexicans (2.3 million between 1987-1990), immigrants began moving to new destination sites in the Southeast (Durand et al. 2000). This trend resulted in a notable change during the 1990s in North Carolina’s Hispanic/Latino population. Specifically, North Carolina ranked among the top fifteen states for total percent increase in Hispanic/Latino population (U.S. Census Bureau 2001c), and among the top ten states with the largest percent change (394%) in Hispanic/Latino population from 1990 to 2000 (U.S. Census Bureau 2001c). While the Hispanic/Latino population in North Carolina is not large in proportion to the total population of the state, nor does the state have the highest concentrations of immigrants relative to typical destination states, it is among the places experiencing the fastest growth (Durand et al. 2000; Frey 1998).

    National estimates indicate that the largest proportions of Hispanic/Latino immigrants are arriving from Mexico (U.S. Census Bureau 2001b). Historically, Mexican migrants have been temporary workers that entered the United States for the purpose of obtaining short-term work for relatively high wages and then they returned to Mexico (Reichert and Massey 1979). However, more recent research on the international immigration of Mexicans has found patterns suggesting a change from previous migration trends. Specifically, as migrants spend more time north of the border they are increasingly likely to establish stable employment, develop relationships with locals, participate in both public and informal organizations, and bring family members across the border to join them. Subsequently, over time these migrants no longer consider their time in the United States temporary, rather they become long-term residents. Those who settle in the United States are likely to have jobs that pay more than minimum wage and they are usually single or their family members have migrated also (Massey 1986; Massey 1987). In his studies of Mexican migration, Massey (1986, 1987) defined migrants as “settled” if they had spent at least three consecutive years in the United States. There is some indication that this pattern of settlement is emerging among the Mexican migrants in North Carolina. For example, in eastern North Carolina, two regional studies found that most Hispanic/Latino respondents were working and had lived in the area for one to five years (Pitt Community College 1999; Simpson et al. 1999).

Employers’ Perceptions of Hispanic/Latino Workers

    Studies of employers’ preferences in areas with heavy concentrations of immigrants have reported that Hispanic/Latino workers are evaluated more favorably than non-Hispanic/Latino workers (Aponte 1996; Kim 1997; Kirschenman and Neckerman 1991; Yoon 1997). These studies found that employers in New York City, Los Angles, and Chicago typically characterized Hispanic/Latino employees as hard working, reliable, willing to do menial labor, less inclined to complain or make demands, and more likely to stay with the job long term. Kim’s (1997) exploratory study in New York City, for example, found that Korean business owners were more likely to hire Mexicans rather than Koreans because the Mexicans worked for lower wages and were less likely to quit and open their own business after being trained. Moreover, the employers in this study reported that Mexican immigrants were willing to accept low wages and undesirable type jobs, whereas blacks tended to be unwilling to work menial jobs for low wages. This research supported earlier findings from Kirschenman and Neckerman’s (1991) study of white Chicago employers who reportedly held negative stereotypes about black workers and stated preferences for Latino workers. 

    Favorable attitudes about Hispanic/Latino workers have also been found in a few studies carried out in the new immigrant destination site of North Carolina (Hyde and Leiter 2000; Leiter, Hossfeld and Tomaskovic-Devey 2001; Leiter and Tomaskovic-Devey 2000). One study, for example, explored employers’ preferences using personal interview data from nine human resource managers in manufacturing industries located in two North Carolina counties. These employers reported that Latino workers were hardworking employees who were willing to do the types of jobs that white and black workers would not perform (Leiter et al. 2001). Other reports indicate that Latino employees are considered to be more likely than white and African American workers to stay with a job long term (Hyde and Leiter 2000). 

    Leiter and Tomaskovic-Devey (2000) have suggested that the generalization that Latinos have a superior work ethic compared to non-Latinos may be supported by the fact that Latinos are less able to draw on conventional means to get hired and promoted. By relying on social contacts for employment, Latino workers reduce their pool of potential employers and this constraint makes them more inclined to work hard to keep the job that they get (Leiter and Tomaskovic-Devey 2000). Other research suggests that Hispanic/Latino immigrants may display a better work ethic compared to other workers because (1) Hispanic/Latino workers tend to make comparisons between the U.S. job conditions and wages to those that are available to them in Mexico, (2) they simply desire to be successful in a new country, and/or (3) they want to meet the expectations of their network based employment sponsor (Aponte 1996). Hyde and Leiter (2000) argue that whether this generalization is true or not, employer’s may be inclined to perpetuate the stereotype of the “good Latino worker” as a means of controlling labor and undermining working class solidarity among low-skilled whites, blacks, and Hispanics. 

Skills and Employment of New Immigrants

    Immigration research shows that fewer barriers to migration (e.g., distance, expense, legal complexity) increase the likelihood that those with less education, fewer skills, and less wealth will migrate; more barriers have the opposite effect (Massey 1993). The United State’s shared border with Mexico and early U.S. immigration policies that recruited Mexicans and established social infrastructure that connected places on both sides of the border, have contributed to emigration from Mexico being “...skewed toward the lower end of its socioeconomic hierarchy” (Massey 1993, p.461). Indeed, Census data show that among new immigrants from Mexico the largest proportion do not hold high school degrees (Frey, Liaw and Hayase 1998). In part because of their low levels of education, migrants are often employed in labor-intensive low-skill type jobs (Griffith 1993; Kim 1997; Yoon 1997). 

    A study using data collected for the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from large and medium sized businesses in North Carolina examined the occupational distribution, ethnicity, and sex of Latino workers in the state (Skaggs, Tomaskovic-Devey, and Leiter 2000). These data were used to assess whether new Hispanic/Latino immigrants were displacing native workers. The researchers reported that the new migrants were concentrated in low-skill low-wage industries and had replaced African American and white workers who had moved on to better positions during the upturn in the economy. 

    Numerous studies indicate that employers of Hispanics usually recruit new workers for low-skill jobs by asking their employees to recommend friends and relatives (Aponte 1996; Leiter and Tomaskovic-Devey 2000; Kim 1997; Massey 1987). For employers, using Mexican kinship networks for finding workers is an effective cost-saving strategy that increases the odds of getting good new employees because the current worker’s reputation is at stake. For new immigrants who lack access to more formal methods of finding employment, being recommended by friends and relatives is an especially useful means of getting a job (Frey 1996). In his study of race differences in men’s employment in the poverty areas of Chicago, Aponte (1996) found that the Mexican immigrants relied on informal methods such as using their networks to find employment. This resulted in Mexican workers being primarily in homogeneous work settings that enhanced the likelihood of further Hispanic/Latino employment and resulted in higher rates of employment for these immigrants compared to whites, blacks, and Puerto Ricans.

    These prior studies of Hispanic/Latino employment provide some important information about the status of these immigrants. Taken together, they indicate that Hispanic/Latino workers are perceived by employers to be good workers. However, the studies thus far on employers’ preferences and the new immigrant population in North Carolina have relied on small samples of particular types of employers. My study uses data from all nonagricultural businesses in an effort to generalize about the attitudes and behaviors of employers in an area that has experienced dramatic growth in the Hispanic/Latino population. The present study addresses the following research questions: What do employers think about the effect of this new immigrant population on the area’s labor pool? Are employers satisfied with the work ethic and performance of their workforce, specifically the Hispanic/Latino workers? Would they be willing to hire more Hispanic/Latino workers in the future if needed? 

    Examining employers’ attitudes and behaviors will contribute to our understanding of the current and future employment chances for Hispanic/Latino workers in this new destination site. On the one hand, if employers are pleased with their new source of labor and indicate they are willing to hire more Hispanic/Latino workers, this suggests that conditions are favorable for Mexican migrants settling permanently in these areas. According to previous research on migrants (noted above), this scenario would eventually result in these immigrants investing their resources locally and contributing to economic growth in the region. On the other hand, if employers’ attitudes are less than favorable about this new source of labor, or these workers are seen primarily as a source of cheap temporary labor, then we might expect very different outcomes. Faced with unstable employment these migrants may be compelled to move to another location and the area would experience another population shift. Or, they might remain and struggle in their effort to find stable employment, which in turn could lead to an increase in their demand for local social services. Gathering information from employers will facilitate an assessment of the likelihood of these different scenarios. In the following sections I describe the data used in the study, present the results, and provide a discussion of the findings. 

Data and Sample 

    For this study, I used data collected from nonagricultural employers in Pitt County, North Carolina during the summer 2001. This area is of interest because it is a new destination site for immigrants and from 1990-1999 the number of Hispanics living in the county increased 136 percent (U.S. Census Bureau 2000). The sample of employers was drawn from a complete list of nonagricultural businesses in the county. I drew a multistage stratified probability sample that first grouped employers by size based on the number of employees: small <=10, medium 11-100, and large size >100. Respondents were then randomly selected from each business group.

    These data were collected via telephone interviews with employers during normal business hours. This method of data collection is a cost-effective and efficient research method for obtaining descriptive and attitudinal information from respondents (Babbie 1994; Miller 1991).  Employers were asked about the race/ethnicity and gender composition of their workforce, their satisfaction with the pool of workers in the county and with their current workforce, the employee recruitment efforts most frequently used, and their preferences for future employees. In total, 426 employers were contacted and 292 interviews were completed producing a response rate of 69 percent. This is a very good response rate by typical standards, but it is especially notable for this project considering that respondents were contacted while they were working. As we expected, the biggest obstacles to completing interviews were busy signals, answering machines, and people not being available to talk with the interviewer. For each business, we had a contact name for the person responsible for making hiring decisions. Each interviewee was informed that their responses were confidential and anonymous. We were pleased to find that when we were able to reach the contact person they were usually willing to be interviewed. In the following analyses, only those employers with complete information on the key variables of interest were retained. This resulted in a final sample of 246 employers. 

Characteristics of Employers and Workers

    The characteristics of the businesses and their workers are shown in Table 1. In this table, the businesses are presented according to their number of employees to allow for comparisons across the various sizes of businesses. The last column in the table is a subsample of the total businesses and lists the characteristics for businesses that have Hispanic/Latino workers. The increased Hispanic/Latino population in the area is reflected in the finding that over one-fifth (22%) of all the businesses in the area have Hispanic/Latino workers.

    Table 1 shows that for each business size and those businesses with Hispanic/Latino workers it is most common to have both high- and low-skill jobs. Compared to large businesses, the small businesses are more likely to have mostly high-skill jobs (39% and 22% respectively), and over twice as likely to have only full-time workers (55% and 22% respectively). As an indication that Hispanic/Latino workers are not limited to low-skill jobs, slightly over one-fifth of the businesses that have Hispanic/Latino workers report that all of their workers are doing high-skill jobs. Only twelve percent of the businesses with Hispanic/Latino workers report having only low-skilled workers. Over one-third of the businesses with Hispanic/Latino workers report that all of their workers are employed full-time. These findings in Table 1 show that most Hispanic/Latino workers are employed in businesses requiring various skill types and a notable proportion have full-time employment. 

    Requiring workers to have a high school degree is not overwhelmingly mandated for employment in this area. About three-fifths of employers of each business size require their workers to have a high school degree; two-fifths of each business type do not require it. Current immigration literature shows that many of the new Mexican migrants do not have high school degrees. This trend is reflected in the finding that only thirty-six percent of employers with Hispanic/Latino workers require their employees to have a high school degree. 

    The likelihood of having Hispanic/Latino workers grows as the business size increases. Thus, the small businesses with fewer than eleven employees were the least likely to employ Hispanics. Almost one-quarter (23%) of the medium sized businesses had Hispanic/Latino workers and nearly all (83%) of the large businesses, (i.e., those with more than one hundred employees) reported having Hispanic employees.

    The two most common employee recruitment methods for all sizes of business and for those with Hispanic/Latino workers are informal techniques that rely on word of mouth. Specifically, the majority of employers use the practice of having current workers recommend friends and family as potential employees and they ask their own acquaintances to recommend workers. Consistent with the previous literature on Hispanic/Latino employment, asking current employees to recommend others is clearly the most popular recruitment method used by businesses with Hispanic/Latino workers; 84 percent reported this method. Using employment agencies and displaying help wanted signs were the least likely methods to be used by all business types. These findings indicate that worker’s social networks are a very important link to obtaining employment in this area. 

    The sex composition of the workforces varies by size of business. As shown in Table 1, small businesses have a workforce that is on average over one-half male (56%), while the medium size businesses have only slightly fewer male (48%) than female workers. The large size businesses employ the smallest percentage of men (averaging 33%), making this size business the most likely to hire women. On average the employers with Hispanic/Latino workers employ about equal numbers of men and women. There is evidence of sex segregation among businesses with Hispanic/Latino workers. Of those businesses with Hispanic/Latino workers, the largest percentage employ only men (44%), about one-fifth have only women workers, and about one-third employ both men and women. This shows that while two-thirds (66%) of the businesses employ only Hispanics of the same sex, both male and female Hispanic/Latino workers are finding employment in this area. 

    Small businesses are the most racially homogeneous with white workers making up over three quarters (79 %) of their workforce. Compared to the other businesses, large-size businesses have the most racially heterogeneous workforce with 50 percent white, 44 percent black, and 6 percent other race. Table 1 shows that Hispanics are employed in businesses that are racially diverse with workforces that are one-half white and one-third black. This finding suggests that in eastern North Carolina new Mexican immigrants are not concentrated in racially homogeneous work settings.

Employer’s Attitudes

    The focus of this study was to describe the attitudes and behaviors of employers with Hispanic/Latino workers in an effort to ascertain the employment standing of these new immigrants. 

    Table 2 presents attitudinal information from employers with Hispanic/Latino workers. What is immediately striking is the considerable consensus among these employers concerning Hispanic/Latino workers and the high level of satisfaction they have about their current workforce. Nearly all of the employers rated the work ethic of their Hispanic/Latino workers as “excellent” or “good” and stated that they would be willing to hire more Hispanic/Latino workers in the future. These attitudes suggest that currently these migrants are valued workers with positive prospects for future employment. 

    Employers were asked several questions intended to assess their opinions about the effects of the growing Hispanic/Latino population on the area’s business environment. As shown in Table 2, the majority (73%) of the employers stated that more Hispanic/Latino immigrants coming into the area resulted in an increase in the number of available good workers. Almost one-third stated that they would lose business or the quality of their product would decline if Hispanic/Latino workers were not available to hire. This suggests that Hispanic/Latino workers have filled an important labor demand for a notable proportion of these businesses. 

    Most employers with Hispanic/Latino workers reported low to normal employee turnover, suggesting job stability in these businesses. A lack of proficiency in English has created barriers for some Spanish-speaking immigrants (see Leiter and Tomaskovic-Devey 2000). Perhaps as an indication that they are attempting to reduce any language difficulties on the job, forty percent of employers have a translator working in their business.

    While employers held overwhelmingly favorable views of their own workers, they were more conservative in their attitudes about workers in the area. When asked to rate the quality of the pool of workers in the area, only slightly more than half of employers (54%) rated it as excellent or good, while forty-two percent rated it as fair. Over two-thirds of the employers with Hispanic/Latino workers reported that they have difficulty finding good workers. These findings suggest that some employers perceive notable differences between immigrant workers and the overall pool of workers in the area. 

    Table 2 shows that the majority of employers with Hispanic/Latino workers are white. However, there is minority representation among employers, including two Hispanic/Latino employers. This indicates that some Hispanics have obtained advanced positions in eastern North 
Carolina. In businesses with Hispanic/Latino workers, there were slightly more men (56%) than women (44%) employers. 

    Taken together, these findings suggest that employers who currently have Hispanic/Latino workers value these employees because of their performance on the job. A notable percentage of employers expressed that they needed this new pool of workers for the success of their business or to ensure the quality of their products. Perhaps most importantly for future predictions about the employment situation in this region for Hispanic/Latino workers, these employers reported that they are likely to continue employing Hispanics. 

     In the present study, employers of Hispanic/Latino workers expressed that this new population was good for the area. Research shows that an expanding population can be an economic boost for the region as a whole because the new population creates a demand for goods and services (Frey et al. 1998). However, immigrant labor can also reduce likelihood of progressive change. Papademetriou (1994) states, “Ready access to immigrants as low-wage labor also diminishes the incentive for some industries to innovate, further rationalize the production process, and upgrade jobs” (p. 19). This scenario may very well apply to those Hispanic/Latino workers filling the types of jobs that other workers are not willing to take. At this point, this willingness provides them with employment. How long this trend will continue is an empirical question for future research.

    One of the findings revealed that Hispanic/Latino workers are employed in businesses that offer jobs of all skill types. However, this survey did not ask about whether Hispanic/Latinos were in the types of jobs that allowed for advancement to better paying and more secure positions. Our current post-industrial economy increasing requires post-high school educations and advanced skill for employment in the best advanced type jobs (Frey et al. 1998), and most new Mexican  immigrants lack a high school degree. It is possible that this educational deficit will become an increasing problem for Hispanic/Latino workers in near future. Being confined to low-skill jobs not only has economic consequences, it may eventually affect workers’ sense of well-being. A study by Soriano and Ramirez (1991) found high levels of anxiety and depression in Hispanics working in job environments that provided unequal pay, lacked promotion opportunities, and displayed little ethnic group influence or social power. These are a just a few of the concerns that employers with Hispanic/Latino workers must address in the future to ensure further successful relations. 

    While the attitudes reported here suggest good employment prospects for Hispanic/Latino immigrants in the future, it is important to note that these data were collected after a period of national economic expansion. It is possible that during times of an economic recession with high rates of unemployment, employers may express different views about these new immigrant workers. For example, in California the anti-immigrant sentiment that led to the passing of Proposition 187 was preceded by an economic recession in the state (Durand et al. 2000). However, my findings suggest that if the current conditions continue then employers with Hispanic/Latino workers in eastern North Carolina are likely to retain their workers. 

     A key finding of the present study is the overall positive attitudes of employers toward their Hispanic/Latino workers. Nearly all employers rated their Hispanic/Latino workers as excellent or good workers. Unfortunately these data do not provide information for the specific reasons underlying the employers’ attitudes. It is possible that the employers softened their responses about their attitudes toward Hispanic/Latino workers due to apprehension about legal issues or political correctness. Also, these data did not allow an examination of the extent to which employers’ positive ratings of Hispanic/Latino workers was related to the willingness of these workers to work for lower wages compared to other workers. As stated earlier, other studies have reported that employers favor Hispanic/Latino workers because they are willing to do menial labor for low wages and they are less inclined to complain or make demands. Future research with information about racial/ethnic differences in the job-type and wages of nonagricultural employees would further clarify this relationship. 

    In sum, it appears from the findings in the present study that employment conditions are working out well for employers and Hispanic/Latino immigrants in the new destination site of eastern North Carolina. The new workers are securing employment and earning the favor of their employers. Hispanic/Latino workers are employed in businesses requiring various skill types and a notable proportion have full-time employment. Employers expressed that these new immigrants increased the number of available good workers and that they are willing to hire more Hispanic/Latino workers in the future. 

Aponte, Robert. 1996. “Urban Employment and the Mismatch Dilemma: Accounting for the Immigration Exception.” Social Problems 43:268-283.

Babbie, Earl. 1994. The Practice of Social Research. Seventh Edition. CA: Wadsworth Publishing.

Durand, Jorge, Douglas S. Massey, and Fernando Charvet. 2000. “The Changing Geography of Mexican Immigration to the United States: 1910-1996.” Social Science Quarterly  81:1-15.

Frey, William H. 1998. “The Diversity Myth.” American Demographics 20:38-44.

Frey, William H. 1996. “Immigration, Domestic Migration, and Demographic Balkanization of America: New Evidence for the 1990s.” Population and Development Review 22 (4): 741-764.

Frey, William H., Kao-Lee Liaw, and Yasuko Hayase. 1998. “South-North Immigrants' Settlement and Opportunity Structures in the U.S.” Asian and Pacific Migration Journal 7:93-125.

Fullerton, Howard N. 1997. “Labor Force 2006: Slowing Down and Changing Composition.”   Monthly Labor Review 120 (11):123-139.

Griffith, David. 1993. Jones’s Minimal: Low-Wage Labor in the United States. NY: State University of New York Press. 

Hyde, Katie and Jeffrey Leiter. 2000. “Overcoming Ethnic Intolerance.” The Journal of Common Sense Winter: 14-19.

Kim, Dae Young. 1999. “Beyond Co-ethnic Solidarity: Mexican and Ecuadorean Employment in Korean-owned Businesses in New York City.”  Ethnic and Racial Studies 22:581-605.

Kirschenman, J. and K. M. Neckerman. 1991. “We'd love to Hire Them But...The Meaning of Race for Employers.” Pp. 203-232 in The Urban Underclass, edited by C. Jencks and R. Peterson. Washington D.C.: Brookings.

Leiter, Jeffrey and Donald Tomaskovic-Devey. 2000. “The Latino Experience in North Carolina”  Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of The Southern Sociological Society.  New Orleans [Online] Available: http://sasw.chass.ncsu.edu/jeff/latinos/LATINO.HTM

Leiter, Jeffrey, Leslie Hossfeld, and Donald Tomaskovic-Devey. 2001. “North Carolina Employers Look at Latino Workers.” Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of The Southern Sociological Society. Atlanta. [Online] Available
 http://sasw.chass.ncsu.edu/jeff/latinos/LATINO.HTM

Massey, Douglas S. 1993. “Latinos, Poverty, and the Underclass: A New Agenda for Research.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 15(4): 449-475.

Massey, Douglas S. 1987. “Understanding Mexican Migration to the United States.” American Journal of Sociology 92(6):1372-1403.

Massey, Douglas S. 1986. “The Settlement Process Among Mexican Migrants to the United States.”  American Sociological Review 51:670-684.

Miller, Delbert C. 1991. Handbook of Research Design and Social Measurement. Fifth Edition.  CA: Sage Publications. 

Papademetriou, Demetrios G. 1994. “The Economic and Labor Market Effects of Immigration on the United States.” National Forum 74 (3):17-21.

Pitt Community College. 1999. Hispanic/Latino Educational Goals Survey. ECU Regional Development Services. 

Reichert, Joshua S. and Douglas S. Massey. 1979. “Patterns of Migration from a Mexican Sending Community: A Comparison of Legal and Illegal Migrants.” International Migration Review 13:599-623.

Simpson, Malcolm T. Jr., S. Richard Brockett, Kelly Arena, and Erik Hofmann. 1999. Hispanic Economic Impact Study: An Eastern North Carolina Analysis. East Carolina University’s Regional Development Institute.

Skaggs, Sheryl, Jeffrey Leiter, and Donald Tomaskovic-Devey. 2000. “Latino/a Employment  Growth in North Carolina: Ethnic Displacement or Replacement?” [Online]. Available:
 http://sasw.chass.ncsu.edu/jeff/latinos/LATINO.HTM

Soriano, Fernando I. and Albert Ramirez. 1991. “Unequal Employment Status and Ethnicity: Further Analysis of the USPI-ESPI Model.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 13 (4):391-400.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2001a. “Resident Population Estimates of the United States by Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: April 1, 1990 to July 1, 1999, with Short-term Projections to November 1, 2000.” [Online]. Available 
  http://www.census.gov/population/estimates/nation/intfile3-1.txt

---.  2001b. “Hispanic Population by Type for Regions, States, and Puerto Rico: 1990 and 2000.”  Table 2. [Online]. Available:
 http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-3.pdf

---.  2001c. “Census 2000: Top 10 States by Hispanic Percent Change.” [Online]. Available:
 http://www.census.gov/mso/www/rsf/hisorig/sld015.htm

---. 2000. “Numeric and Percent Population Change for Counties: Within-State and National Rankings, April 1, 1990 to July 1, 1999.”  Population Estimates Program. Internet release date March 2000. Population Division, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C.

Yoon, In-Jin. 1997. On My Own: Korean Businesses and Race Relations in America. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.