Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T20:05:27.710Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

How Race, Sex, and Age Frame the Use of Authority by Local Government Officials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Shannon Portillo
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Thanks to the civil rights movement, women and racial and ethnic minorities increasingly hold positions of public authority—but they experience and exercise this authority differently from white men. Based on 162 narratives collected from 49 US local government officials (city administrators and police), I find that women, minorities, and younger officials in positions of authority face a paradox of rules. Because they have lower social status with the public and within their organizations, they must rely on formal and explicit rules as a key basis for their authority, but such reliance causes their very authority to be questioned. Social status based on implicit assumptions about social identities, including race or ethnicity, sex, and age, originates outside of organizations and has effects society wide. This study shows that social status continues to permeate US local government organizations in both subtle and explicit ways, even in bureaucratic settings that are formally committed to merit and professional norms.

Type
Articles
Information
Law & Social Inquiry , Volume 35 , Issue 3 , Summer 2010 , pp. 603 - 623
Copyright
Copyright © American Bar Foundation, 2010 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Albiston, Christina R. 2005. Bargaining in the Shadow of Social Institutions: Competing Discourse and Social Change in Workplace Mobilization of Civil Rights. Law & Society Review 39 (1): 11–49.Google Scholar
Backarach, Samuel. B., Bamberger, Peter, and Mundell, Bryan. 1993. Status Inconsistency in Organizations. Journal of Organizational Behavior 14 (1): 21–36.Google Scholar
Black, Donald. 1976. The Behavior of Law. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. 2005. The Social Structures of the Economy. Malden, MA: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Bumiller, Kristen. 1987. Victims in the Shadow of the Law: A Critique of the Model of Legal Protection. Signs 12 (3): 421–39.Google Scholar
Cohen, Ira J., and Rogers, Mary F. 1994. Autonomy and Credibility: Voice as Method. Sociological Theory 12 (2): 304–27.Google Scholar
Cottrell, Leonard S. Jr. 1942. The Adjustment of the Individual to His Age and Sex Roles. American Sociological Review 7(4): 617–20.Google Scholar
Denzin, Norman K., and Lincoln, Yovanna S., eds. 2003. The Landscape of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Ewick, Patricia, and Silbey, Susan. 1995. Subversive Stories and Hegemonic Tales: Toward a Sociology of Narrative. Law & Society Review 29 (2): 197–211.Google Scholar
Ewick, Patricia, and Silbey, Susan. 1998. The Common Place of Law: Stories from Everyday Life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ewick, Patricia, and Silbey, Susan. 2003. Narrating Social Structure: Stories of Resistance to Legal Authority. American Journal of Sociology 108 (6): 1328–72.Google Scholar
Glaser, Barney G., and Strauss, Anselm L. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Edison, NJ: Aldine Transaction.Google Scholar
Hawkins, Keith. 2002. Law as Last Resort. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haraway, William. 2002. Rediscovering Process Values in Employee Grievance Procedures. Administration & Society 34 (5): 499–521.Google Scholar
Hughes, Everett Cherrington. 1945. Dilemmas and Contradictions of Status. The American Journal of Sociology 50 (5): 353–59.Google Scholar
Ladson‐Billings, Gloria. 2003. Racialized Discourses and Ethnic Epistemologies. In The Landscape of Qualitative Research, 2nd ed., ed. Denzin, Norman K. and Lincoln, Yovanna S., 398–432. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Lipsky, Michael. 1980. Street‐Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Services. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Maines, David. 1993. Narrative's Moment and Sociology's Phenomena. Sociological Quarterly 34 (1): 17–30.Google Scholar
Marshall, Catherine, and Rossman, Gretchen. 1999. Designing Qualitative Research, 3rd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Maynard‐Moody, Steven, and Musheno, Michael. 2003. Cops, Teachers, Counselors: Stories from the Front Lines of Public Service. Ann Arbor: Michigan University Press.Google Scholar
Maynard‐Moody, Steven, and Portillo, Shannon. Forthcoming. “Street‐Level Bureaucracy Theory.” In Oxford Handbook of American Bureaucracy, ed. Robert, Durant. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McCann, Michael. 1994. Rights at Work: Pay Equity Reform and the Politics of Legal Mobilization. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Oberweis, Trish, and Musheno, Michael. 2001. Knowing Rights. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Patterson, Molly, and Monroe, Kristen R. 1998. Narrative in Political Science. Annual Review of Political Science 1: 315–31.Google Scholar
Pressman, Jeffrey, and Wildavsky, Aaron 1979. Implementation. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Prottas, Jeffrey M. 1979. People‐Processing: The Street‐Level Bureaucrat in Public Service Bureaucracies. Lexington, MA: Lexington Press.Google Scholar
Sewell, William H. J. 1992. A Theory of Structure: Duality, Agency, and Transformation. American Journal of Sociology 98 (1): 1–29.Google Scholar
Silberstein, Sandra. 1988. Ideology as Process. In Gender and Discourse: The Power of Talk, ed. Alexandra, Todd and Fisher, Sue, 125–51. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.Google Scholar
Sitkin, Sim B., and Bies, Robert J., eds. 1994. The Legalization of Organizations: A Multi‐Theoretical Perspective. In The Legalistic Organization, 19–43. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Stein, Harold, ed. 1952. Public Administration and Policy Development: A Case Book. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and Company.Google Scholar
Stryker, Robin. 2003. Mind the Gap: Law, Institutional Analysis and Socioeconomics. Socio-Economic Review (1): 335–67.Google Scholar
Stryker, Sheldon, and Macke, Anne Statham. 1978. Status Inconsistency and Role Conflict. Annual Review of Sociology 4 (1): 57–90.Google Scholar
Turner, Bryan S. 1988. Status. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Waldo, Dwight. 1948. The Administrative State: A Study of the Political Theory of American Public Administration. New York: Holmes and Meier.Google Scholar
West, Candace, and Zimmerman, Don H. 1987. Doing Gender. Gender and Society 1 (2): 125–51.Google Scholar