Jack and Diane are both applying for a job in the advertising division of a leading national magazine. Both of these applicants graduated from very reputable colleges. Diane achieved a solid B average while Jack was rated slightly higher. Both ranked in the top one-third of their graduating class. Jack worked for a relative in a family owned advertising agency over the summer. Diane, who had to help out with her younger sisters and brothers, took some required classes over the summer so she would have more free time during the school year. She has no advertising experience.

Jack and Diane are both called in for an interview. The personnel officer notes that both seem intelligent, hard working, and in need of the job. Because of Jack’s experience in advertising and higher grade point average, he ranks slightly higher than Diane.

Who gets the job? That depends on the company they are interviewing with. In the past Jack would have received the job right away, regardless of rating. Two main reasons being because Diane is a woman, and because she is black. Until recently the firm wouldn’t have even considered hiring her, except possibly for a clerical position.

Today the situation is much different. Diane may be hired for the very same reasons she was rejected in the past even though Jack’s application looked better. This reason is to make up for past discrimination. To address this, the company has implemented a plan to increase its number of minorities in its advertising division.

Through the plan, “no prospective employee may be discriminated against because of their race or sex.” This plan is also used when firing, giving promotions, and when layoffs take place (Woods 6).

Jack and Diane are fictional, but the plan used to help them get their job is not. This plan is known as affirmative action. One source explains that affirmative action is “any steps taken by a company to increase the number or improve its ranks of minorities workers”(Woods 8). There are no easy answers to affirmative action; however, by learning about it, you will better understand the complex issues and the difficult decisions that have been made in the past and that will be made in the future.

General Information

There are many different ways affirmative action plans can be operated. Most of these plans differ tremendously from company to company. Some of these plans are implemented voluntarily (Summit). Others may be instituted by court order, and yet others are put into place to satisfy the demands of the government (Woods 10). The companies who institute a plan for the government are doing so to retain good government report and to continue to receive governmental grants (Summit).

The Enforcement Agencies of Affirmative Action

There are many enforcement organizations behind the affirmative action curtain. These commissions are the police of the business world. The state and local regulations are governed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). The EEOC, along with state and local agencies, follows up on individual cases and complaints of discrimination (Fear and Ross 27). Most of these investigations do not go in-depth to find the company’s history of minority workers. Most likely, the complaints are followed up with back pay for the individual who has been discriminated against. After examining to see if any discriminatory acts have occurred, the court may decide to set quotas for the company to meet (32). If these quotas are not met, the company may be stripped of all federal grants that would have previously been awarded to it (33).

The Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) heads the investigations over affirmative action on the federal level. This organization conducts itself by “examining if an employer meets all of the technical provisions of the regulations set forth by the government”(Fear and Ross 25).

The OFCCP ensures that a company is implementing its policies correctly and follows up on all affirmative action complaints against that company. The OFCCP enforces all laws that are put forth by government and presidential issue (29). This organization is much more statistically minded. They meticulously study the percentage of available minority workers in the area, and compare that number to the percentage of minority workers in the company’s history (25). The OFCCP deals strictly with class action lawsuits, which involve a number of complaints against a single firm.

These lawsuits usually hurt the firm more by awarding a lump sum to each plaintiff. Class action suits also raise more publicity against the firm, hurting its reputation.

Legal History

In 1961, President John F. Kennedy used his power of executive order to make a special requirement that all companies dealing with the federal government must abide by. This order stated that all companies doing business with the government must have an affirmative action plan (Bergmann 83). This was the first time the term affirmative action was used. The public was skeptical, and didn’t know what it meant. The problem with Kennedy’s proposal was that it specified no quotas. The plan also gave the public no real way as to how they were supposed to achieve his goal. With no real strong backing of the order, it did little to help matters.

In 1964, The civil rights act was enacted. Title VI of the act called for a ban of discrimination in all public places (Fear and Ross 55). With the civil rights movement strengthening, this article had more power behind it then the earlier Kennedy order. Unlike Kennedy’s presidential order, This act was accepted and passed by the government.

In 1984, the supreme court decided that an employer must have some way to negate who they could hire while proving that there was no discrimination involved in the decision process. The court stated that “an employer has discretion to choose among equally qualified candidates for a job”(Woods 7). The ruling also stated that the employer does not have to give preference to minorities if they are under qualified.

Two Sides to Every Story

As with any controversial topic, there is always two ways of looking at the subject. Most of the time, both sides think that they are the right one. By looking at both supporting and opposed views, you may be able to be swayed to one side of the table. Both sides of the argument present a good case. Taking a look at the admissions process in colleges and universities across the states best represents the supporters’ view.

Universities and colleges are one of the biggest users of the affirmative action plan. It is important to note that most colleges accept anybody. Affirmative action during the admissions process doesn’t really come into play until private colleges are studied. Only 20-30% of all colleges are in this category (Bowen and Bok 19). This is a high enough percentage to note how affirmative action works during the admissions process.

In one study of a private ivy league college corporation, it was found that “above 90% of the black applicants scored higher on the SAT than the average black test taker”(Bowen and Bok 19). These students also scored 75% higher than the average white test taker (19). On the other hand, the white applicants scored over 95% higher than the national average of white test takers (19). These white applicants scored an average of 1284, which is 186 points higher than the black applicants (1098) (21). Only 29% of the black applicants achieved scores over 1200. Over 75% of the white applicants achieved this mark (21). How can a schools admissions office, which is trying to increase diversity, come up with the answers to the obvious question? Supporters say that admissions officers must look at other factors then test scores to avoid reverse discrimination. The opposing view states that the black students should not be picked over the whites simply to achieve ethnic diversity.

When speaking about the topic of admissions into private colleges, supporters of affirmative action use the word merit a lot. By looking at an applicant’s merit, the school can help itself meet its three objectives. These objectives include the following questions: Does this student have a high potential for academic excellence? Does this applicant allow other students to benefit educationally from diversity on campus? Does admitting this student address long-term society needs (Summit)? Supporters are also quick to state that the merit of an applicant highly exceeds any test score. Accumulative grades account for only 15-20% of the difference between students, and even less among black students (Bowen and Bok 277). The merit of a student must also depend on the type of school he/she is applying to. Some schools are more research minded, while others institute a more applied curriculum.

The opposed views over affirmative action take a close look at analytical circumstances rather than a more merit minded supporting view (Woods 11). These arguments are based not so much on the ethical side of the controversy, but more along the lines of good business practice. Opposed views also point out many thought provoking ideas through their arguments.

The biggest and most convincing argument against affirmative action comes from the business world. The main goal of any business is to succeed at making money. Through the following arguments, it is shown how much of a financial drain hiring under qualified help can be to a company or business. These cost factors are broken down into two categories, including tangible cost and intangible cost (Fear and Ross 4).

Tangible costs are those that can be directly related back to the employee. These costs include the cost of recruiting, interviewing, employee salary, benefit programs, and training. Intangible cost includes profit loss in production, loss of potential, productivity, increased cost associated with poor attendance, salary grievances, and insurance claims (4). When all these factors are added together, it doesn’t take too many poor workers to see the company lose money. In an analysis of complete loss or gain, it was shown that the selection of poor personnel could cost a company paying an average of $13,000 per year, a loss of $5,000 per poor worker (5). If this number is multiplied by how many times this might happen per year, it may add up to hundreds of thousands of dollars. This obviously takes a huge chunk out of the profit gains for the company. Operating managers have finally realized that hiring under qualified employees because of their face value has eventually and inevitably cost their companies money.

Some Alternatives

With all the controversy surrounding affirmative action, some say that there must be an alternative that more people can live with. Opponents say that better education is the key to fixing affirmative action (Bergmann 105). The supporters reiterate that better education will never decrease the amount of discrimination due to race, sex, and religion (Bergmann 132).

The instituting of anti-discrimination laws and class action lawsuits against discrimination is one semi-effective tool to decrease discrimination in our work place. Although these plans can be effective, they have their drawbacks. Anti-discrimination lawsuits are hard to win and they take a long time to go through the courts (Taylor 99). Although class action lawsuits produce substantially more publicity and create a greater financial burden on the firm, it is hard to build a case against a large company (Taylor102). These firms have too many ways to get around the laws that are put into place to protect minorities. Still, others say that all that needs to be done is to enforce laws against discrimination. If the government could achieve this, we wouldn’t need affirmative action in the first place. Too much of the discrimination that goes on is done behind closed doors. This makes it very hard to enforce laws against discrimination (Bergmann 172).

Whether affirmative action lives or dies, alternatives must be looked at and studied to see if any one of them or combination of them could achieve fairness in our job market. The arguments over affirmative action will continue. Even the most active supporters of affirmative action agree that it is a temporary solution to the age-old problems of racism and sexism (Bergmann 167). No one knows when the healing process of these scars will complete. The end to this debate will probably only come when affirmative action plans are abolished and the world realizes that there is only one race; mankind.

Bibliography

Bermann, Babara. ed. In Defense of Affirmative Action. New York, New York: Basic, 1996.

Bowen, William. and Bok, Derek.ed. The Shape of the River. Princton, New Jersey: Princton, 1998.

Fear, Richard and Ross, James. ed. Jobs, Dollars, and EEO. New York, New York: McGraw, 1983.

Summit, Gazella. Personal interview. 8 December. 1999.

Taylor, Raymond. ed. Affirmative Action at Work. Pittsbugh, Pennsylvania: Pittsburgh Press, 1991.

Vesterman, William.ed. Reading and Writing Short Arguments. Mountain View. California:Mayfield,1997

Sowell, Thomas. ed. “A World of Virtual Reality” Vesterman. 175-177.

Woods. Geroldine, ed. Affirmative Action. San Francisco, California: Watts. 1998.

Keywords : Term Paper, Sociology, Is Affirmative Action Unwarrented?

Average user rating

   (0 vote)