Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Importance of affirmative action
Significance in affirmative action
Relevance of affirmative action
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Importance of affirmative action
Affirmative action served its purpose and is no longer essential. Definition of affirmative action -- steps an organization takes to actively seek qualified applicants from groups undenepresented in the workforce. Affirmative action policies were developed to address long histories of discrimination faced by minorities and women. They first emerged from debates over non-discrimination policies in the 1940s and during the Civil Rights Movement. These debates led to federal executive orders requiring non-discrimination in the employment policies of some government agencies and contractors in the 1940s onwards, and to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Affirmative Action Advantages and Disadvantages Advantages Diversity: We know …show more content…
Reverse discrimination penalizes those from a non-minority group from employment or promotion even when the non-minority applicant is fully qualified. Another major disadvantage is reverse discrimination can generate a negative social bacldash for an organization. Thus, limiting the qualified desired pool of applicants for employment. In my experience as a frontline manager have found (at least in my organization) that senior management has a strong sensitive awareness that favors applicants from a minority group. Senior management tends to favor the minority applicant, simply to avoid a potential lawsuit. I have heard it more than once from managers, "I don 't want to testify in comi again", their stance is to take (what they believe to be) the "safe way out" by hiring the minority applicant. I believe until the management is slapped with a Bakke vs Davis law suit, their perspective will go unchanged. Stigmatization: Affirmative action policies can and does create a stigma that minorities and women obtain positions in a company based on gender, race or ethnicity, rather than …show more content…
However, I also think that affirmative action "programs" are not feasible for all organizations. For example, an affirmative action policy for a small organization (50 people or less) more than likely would be a financial burden and impracticable to implement. In my opinion unless a small organization is attempting to rectify a discrimination issue an affirmative action program is not watTanted. However, large organizations especially those relying on government contracts an Affirmative Action Policy is walTanted. I feel that affirmative action encourages people to look at sex, color or race as a factor during the employment or admissions process, when our goal should be to eliminate it. Affirmative action encourages "reverse racism". Reverse racism is when an employer and college admission representative discriminates against individuals from majority groups. I think that in today 's society in America the issue with racism or sexism is no predominant as it once was. Recent history reflects that a large percentage of minorities are just as educated and qualified professionally as the majority groups. Minorities have served and continue to serve in top management positions across the globe. Look at President Obama
Affirmative action programs may or may not have been appropriate in times past where inequalities were prevalent and programs to build diversity were mandated. In the United States today, where law bars discrimination, I feel employment opportunities should be based on merit and not on race, sex or any other preconceived notion. Actively recruiting candidates that do not meet minimum requirements or standards is counterproductive to any agency that strives to serve the public in an efficient and effective manner and further erode confidence in government.
Affirmative action, while a great idea in the beginning, is no longer needed to make up for the past discrimination of women and minorities. It does not get rid of discrimination, but rather creates it towards whites and men. Any form of discrimination is wrong, whether intentional or unintentional. Businesses and universities will set aside a separate pool for minorities and women so they don’t have to originally compete against the whole pool of applicants. A person’s qualifications and how they got to where they are should not be questioned because of affirmative action. The only reason some people are still questioned or considered undeserving is because affirmative action still takes place. Getting rid of affirmative action in universities and businesses will eliminate reverse discrimination and ensure that their qualifications, along with achievements, will not be questioned based on the skin color or gender of a
Affirmative action doesn't require a company to hire the local percentage of women and minorities, qualified or not. The program determines the percentage of qualified women and minorities available to a company, then sets flexible goals, to be reached in good faith. As a result, numerous studies show that minorities who land their jobs through affirmative action are not less qualified than their colleagues.
First of all, the establishment of affirmative action after the Civil Rights Era of 1960s promoted the thinking of reverse discrimination. Defined by Dictionary, reverse discrimination is “the unfair treatment of members of majority groups resulting from preferential policies, as in college admissions or employment, intended to remedy earlier discrimination against minorities” (Dictionary.com). It is true that women and peop...
From its points of origin, the intended use of affirmative action is to ensure that employees and applicants of jobs are treated equally regardless of their race, religion, and national origin. There is no question about this being the right approach. But, as mentioned in the article, when a company qualifies for government subsidies just for selecting a minority over equally qualified non-minorities, it's difficult to argue that affirmative action is working the way it's supposed to be.
Some feel that affirmative action in universities is the answer to the end of racism and inequality. If more black students get into and graduate from good colleges, more of them will go on to even out the lopsided numbers in the work force. Prejudice secretly slips through everyone¹s thoughts. Or so Barbara Ehrenreich believes when she writes of a quiet, subliminal prejudice that is caused by statistics that prove the fewer numbers of blacks in high profile jobs. When we see ninety percent of leadership roles in the corporate world held by white men, we begin to doubt other¹s competence in that field. With so many minorities in menial roles, people begin to believe the white man is best for ...
According to the Encyclopædia Britannica, affirmative action is “an active effort to improve employment or educational opportunities for members of minority groups and women.” However, despite its well-intentioned policies, it has been the source of much controversy over the years. Barbara Scott and Mary Ann Schwartz mention that “proponents of affirmative action argue that given that racism and discrimination are systemic problems, their solutions require institutional remedies such as those offered by affirmative action legislation” (298). Also, even though racism is no longer direct, indirect forms still exist in society and affirmative action helps direct. On the other hand, opponents to affirm...
The purpose ofAffirmative Action is a simple one, it exists to level the playing field, so to speak, in the areas of hiring and college admissions based on characteristics that usually include race, sex, and/or ethnicity. A certain minority group or gender may be underrepresented in an arena, often employment or academia, in theory due to past or ongoing discrimination against members of the group. In such a circumstance, one school of thought maintains that unless this group is concretely helped to achieve a more substantial representation, it will have difficulty gaining the critical mass and acceptance in that role, even if overt discrimination against the group is eradicated. For this reason, more effort must be made to recruit persons from that background, train them, and lower the entrance requirements for them. (Goldman, 1976, p. 179) Proponents of affirmative action argue that affirmative action is the best way to corre...
Affirmative action in the U.S. started to come about in the early nineteen sixties. It was enacted along with many other anti-segregation laws, as part of the "Civil Rights act of 1964 and an executive order in 1965 (Affirmative, Encyclopedia Britannica par. 2)." Today affirmative action is still going strong. It has many positive aspects, but it also has several negative affects, one of which is "reverse discrimination.
The issue of affirmative action has been a controversial one since its inception. The law was developed during the 1960’s as a result of the civil rights movement and the need to address injustices committed against minorities throughout the United States history. There were multiple attempts to correct the inequities between the majority and the various minorities including the 13, 14 and 15th Amendments. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 allowed for the creation of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) to create rules to end discrimination. Affirmative action came into being with the executive order 11246 issued by President Johnson. The Civil Rights Act and President Johnson’s executive order have been updated throughout the years to address gender, disabilities, age and other characteristics that could be considered discriminatory.
Discrimination has led to under representation in the workforce. Many people would agree that this is not healthy for a multi-racial society. If two people with equal qualifications were applying for a job, then the person from the minority would receive the job. Many individuals argue that this is reverse discrimination. A big problem is that companies may have to hire less qualified members of minority groups to meet the quotas. This means that affirmative action does not eliminate stereotypes and in some cases, it may even make it worse.
Affirmative action is not the source of discrimination, but the vehicle for removing the effects of discrimination. The Labor Department report found less than 100 reverse discrimination cases among more than 3,000 discrimination opinions by the U.S. District Court and the Court of Appeal between 1990 and 1994. Discrimination was established in only six cases. The report found that, “Many of the cases were the result of a disappointed applicant…. erroneously assuming that when a woman or minority got the job, it was because of race or sex, not qualifications.”(SF Chronicle, March 31, 1995) Job discrimination is grounded in prejudice and exclusion, whereas affirmative action is an effort to overcome prejudicial treatment through inclusion. The most effective way to cure society of exclusionary practices is to make special efforts at inclusion, which is exactly what affirmative action does.
According to the United States Department of Labor, affirmative action is the “banning of discrimination and requiring of contractors and subcontractors to take action to ensure that all individuals have an equal opportunity for employment, without regard to race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability or status as a Vietnam era or special disabled veteran” (Dept of Labor 2002). It is essentially a policy of actively hiring and promoting qualified individuals in historically disadvantaged groups such as minorities, women, and disabled veterans. These “equal opportunity” programs were designed to focus on education and employment, and the policies were implemented to take active measures, without the presence of discrimination, to ensure that groups that have historically suffered discrimination have equal opportunities as whites. Affirmative action policies seek to realign the balance of power and opportunity, and have proven to be effective when implemented in the workforce.
Before the idea of affirmative action came into existence, there was the President’s committee on Public Contracts which was designed to oversee federal agencies’ efforts to ensure nondiscrimination in firms with government contracts, the committee could receive complaints of discrimination, conduct educational campaigns, make recommendations to agencies on how to combat discrimination, receive agency enforcement reports, and establish ties with private and public organizations working on equal employment issues.
Affirmative Action was created by the United States government to overcome the effects of past social discrimination by assigning jobs and resources to members of specific groups, such as minorities and women.¹ Now first things first, minority must be defined, a minority is not just the stereotypical African-American or Latino, it is actually a group ...