Blog

What’s in a Name? Wage Inequalities Based on the Ethnic Minority Name of a Job Applicant

Published 5 February 2025 / By Valentina Di Stasio (EUI), Mariña Fernández-Reino (COMPAS), Sanne van Oosten (COMPAS), Paolo Velásquez (COMPAS)

Back to Articles

The organisation People Like Us has recently launched the campaign #Namethebias to advocate for ethnicity pay gap reporting. Their campaign partly relies on data from a correspondence audit of ethnic discrimination in the British labour market conducted by Valentina Di Stasio and Anthony Heath in 2016–2017 as part of the cross-national GEMM project. Valentina Di Stasio, Mariña Fernández-Reino, Sanne van Oosten and Paolo Velásquez are researchers in the EqualStrength project, which investigates cumulative and structural forms of discrimination, outgroup prejudice and hate crimes against ethnic, racial and religious minorities.

Correspondence audits are one of the most reliable methods for detecting discrimination in the first stages of the hiring process. Researchers apply to real job openings with fictitious applications that are identical in every way - matching the skills, education, and work experience of a candidate - with the exception of the applicant’s name. Differences in callbacks between white British applicants and ethnic minority applicants provide an unbiased measure of ethnic discrimination.  

Not all names are equal when applying for jobs 

Looking to the labour market, correspondence audits have a long history in the UK, dating back to the late 1960s. The most recent study, to our knowledge, was conducted in 2016/17 as part of the cross-national GEMM project. The findings from the UK showed that job applications from "Emily" and "James" received significantly more positive responses than those from "Yasmeen" or "Tariq", suggesting that candidates with ethnic minority names face discrimination during the hiring process. Overall, ethnic minority applicants had to submit 60% more applications to receive the same number of positive callbacks as white British applicants. Alarmingly, this level of discrimination in the UK has remained unchanged for half a century and is relatively high by international standards.

Not all non-British names are penalised to the same extent, however. Names associated with non-white or Muslim minorities - such as Abdul or Farzana, Onika or Toriano - face the most severe discrimination, while European names - such as Alba or Álvaro, Claire or Guillaume - are the least affected. 

The ethnic pay gap 

Hiring discrimination has consequences for the ethnic pay gap (the average difference in pay between white Britons and ethnic minorities) in at least two ways. First, ethnic minorities are more likely to apply for jobs they are overqualified for, which results in lower pay than their qualifications would otherwise suggest. Second, employees from white ethnic groups are more likely to be promoted which results in higher pay. These are only the short-term effects. Companies that rely on previous wage levels or ask about wage expectations at the application stage are unknowingly reproducing inequalities. For this reason, companies should regularly disclose employee earnings data across different roles, by ethnicity and other protected characteristics. This is one of the objectives of the People Like Us campaign.  

Changing the policies rather than changing your name 

Additionally, companies could implement blind recruitment procedures during the initial stage of the hiring process which would involve the omission of identifying information from job applications such as names, following examples set by the UK Civil Service and the British Library. This would prevent ethnic minority applicants from feeling compelled to change their names in job applications to avoid discrimination and improve their employment prospects. Research shows that migrants, particularly migrant women, experience a significant increase in their annual earnings after changing names. However, what may be viewed as a pragmatic passing strategy can often come at a psychological cost as individuals report feeling less authentic during the hiring process and experience family and identity conflict.

Instead of changing names, a more effective approach is to change policies at the organisational level. Companies that use standardised application templates tend to report lower discrimination, showing the effect organisational policies can have. Omitting names from job applications is another one of many interventions aimed at eliminating discrimination in hiring, pay, and promotions. However, anonymised hiring procedures are not a universal solution to eliminate ethnic discrimination. Blind recruitment policies may postpone discrimination to later stages of the hiring process and cannot correct for the results of cumulative discrimination over the life course that puts some ethnic minorities in a disadvantaged position when applying for jobs.

Thus far, we have only discussed the relatively short-term effects of wage inequality. However, wage disparities can severely impact the wealth and opportunities ethnic minority groups accumulate over a lifetime. For example, initial pay disparities in the first job can lead to inequality in subsequent roles, especially when employers base salaries on previous earnings. The consequences of wage disparities can extend far beyond employment. Lower incomes can reduce the likelihood of securing stable housing or the ability to afford rent which are critical issues in competitive housing markets in urban centres such as London. Increased reliance on temporary housing, and the added stress of housing insecurity can, in turn, diminish the mental capacity to focus on job applications or perform well at work. Furthermore, employers may hesitate to hire individuals without permanent housing or living in deprived areas (i.e. address-based discrimination), perpetuating a vicious cycle.

As ethnic minority individuals progress through life, these challenges multiply. Insecure employment and housing can make it harder to plan for or afford children. For those with children, the high cost and limited availability of childcare further exacerbate inequalities. Families struggling with housing or employment instability may find it harder to secure childcare, which in turn creates additional stress and limits opportunities to perform well in the workplace. These interconnected barriers can result in persistent wage inequality, perpetuating the cycle of disadvantage. Investigating the accumulation of discrimination over a lifetime is complex but essential. This is one of the key objectives of the EU- and UKRI-funded ongoing EqualStrength project, where we are working to uncover how these cycles of inequality evolve - and how they can be broken. Stay tuned for our findings, which will be published on the COMPAS website once our fieldwork is complete.