Une suggestion. Cordialement

"Cultural taxation” is a term coined by Amado Padilla in 1994 as a way of describing the unique burden placed on ethnic minority faculty in carrying out their responsibility to service the university.

He defined “cultural taxation” as the obligation to show good citizenship towards the institution by serving its needs for ethnic representation on committees, or to demonstrate knowledge and commitment to a cultural group, which, though it may bring accolades to the institution, is not usually rewarded by the institution on whose behalf the service was performed.1

This “cultural taxation” phenomenon, as stated earlier, is the price that most faculty of color must pay for admission to and retention in the Academy.

“Cultural taxation” is a stealth workload escalator for faculty of color. And like stress, it can be a silent killer of professional careers and aspirations.

Everyone knows and accepts the notion that minority faculty are expected to serve as role models and mentors for minority students. Yet, this expectation is never actually stated during the recruitment or hiring process.

Even when institutions advertise in trade journals or magazines directed at underrepresented communities for faculty positions, there is usually never any mention of that viewpoint or responsibility.

Clearly, serving on university and department committees as the “minority” representative is taxing in itself. But being expected to “speak for your people” as well, is a form of “taxation without representation” at whose mere consideration, would make most faculty shudder.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 18 hrs (2021-07-17 01:47:57 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Erratum: intégration instead of integration

cf. résumé de
https://www.erudit.org/fr/revues/cjhe/2017-v47-n3-cjhe03415/...

"cultural or identity taxation"
-> "l’imposition culturelle ou identitaire"