Affirmative Action In The United States

Read the full essay 988 words
Affirmative Action in the United States


The writer Mary Anne Warren is focusing on describing the current practices in many organizations today in regards to the implementing a goal vs. a quota system for the purposes of affirmative action. She defines a quota as "Those who use the term "quotas" pejoratively tend to assume that the numerical standards will be set so high or enforced so rigidly that strong reverse discrimination-that is, the deliberate hiring of demonstrably less well qualified candidates-will be necessary to implement them." (Warren, 370). Warren then describes goal as "The term "goal", on the other hand, suggests that this will not be the case, and that good faith efforts to comply with the standards by means short of strong reverse discrimination will be acceptable." (Warren, 370).

The critical thing that must be understood when exploring the subject is that the writer is describing how affirmative action is being applied in American organizations today in other words the current reality. However, she fails to speak to us about how the law designs this program to function. This is the critical component that American organizations must be educated to understand.

Affirmative action as defined by law is most definitively not based on a quota system. In fact, what is not widely known is that this program can be equally used by all individuals provided that an inequality exists in the group that they belong to as not being reflected in the work force.

So what is affirmative action? What is it designed to do? It is not designed to provide an opportunity to an unqualified candidate. It is designed as "a way of compensating individuals or groups for past injustices or for present disadvantages stemming form past injustices" (Warren, 373). It is further designed "as a means about bringing about further future goods-for example, raising the status of downtrodden groups." (Warren, 373). The keyword in these quotes is the word "group".

Who are these groups? The law has identified them. Some of the groups identified are: race, religious beliefs, blood trait, gender, disability (whether physical or mental), veteran status, national origin, and the list continues. In no way does this require that you have to hire an unqualified person for a position because they fall into one or more of these groups. What it does mean is that you can not discriminate and exclude a person from getting a job, getting promoted, and other factors, just because they happen to fall into that group.

How does the law say that affirmative action should be applied? It would play out something like this. First of all, the demographics and the socioeconomic factors in the neighborhood where the organization is based primarily control affirmative action. So that means, for example, let's say your neighborhood is 60% women and 40% men, 50% White, 25% Hispanic, 20% Black and 5% Asian. In a nutshell what affirmative action requires is that your business should reflect that in your work force. Naturally as demographics change so do the goals. Let's say that in a business you have 75% Whites, 15% Blacks and 10% Hispanic, with no Asians. Well, your goal would then be to increase the amount of Hispanics, blacks and Asians. Likewise if your community was predominantly white (let's say 75% white) then you should have 75% of your work force be white.

Understanding this, how does affirmative action as the law intended it to be applied in this case study.

In the first case the man should obviously get the job. Why? Because the woman lacks a doctrine which is an important key requirement for a tenured position. We don't need to look at this further.

In the second and third case, the key factor that has to be considered is, do the candidates both meet the minimum requirements for the job? It appears that they both do, so both are qualified. The fact that one of them may have additional skills that are desirable but not required for the position is not a factor to consider when determining minimum qualifications. Now what the organization has to do, according to affirmative action is to look at their demographics and see what group they are

Related Topics

Social inequality Discrimination Education policy Affirmative action Reverse discrimination Disadvantage Johnson v. Transportation Agency Regents of the University of California v. Bakke what is affirmative action quota system reverse discrimination faith efforts word group american organizations critical component injustices good faith term goal quotas inequality quotes mary anne warren united states

More Free Essays Like This

Affirmative Action
Animal Farm As A Social Criticism
Animal Farm As Animal Satire
C auses
Capstone Report
499 Report
Sociology Report
Class Report
Williams Class Report
Childhood Obesity: Cultural and Social influences
China Town
499 Capstone Report
Cloning: Why We Shouldnt Be Against It
Conflict Criminology and Sociology
Economic Notes
England: The City Of Today
Feminism And Gender Equality In The 1990s
French Literature In The Age Of Reason
Gender Inequality & Theories Of Patriarchy
Jane Eyre - Miss Temples Influence On Jane
Judy Felner
Justin Khouw
Labor And Unions In America
Marxs Theory Of Money
Master Harold And The Boys: Thematic Concerns
Organizational Justice
Othello comparison
SOC69 - Project 3
Rise of American Industry
Social Structure
The Cons of Globalization, an Essay Against Global
The Distributive Justice Of The Market
The End of Poverty Reaction Paper
The Evolution Of Inequality In The U.S. Legal System
The Hunchback Of Notre-Dame
The Ineptitude Of The United States
The Inequality Of American Justice
The Inverted Narcissist
The Plead for Peace and Equality through Song
The Problem With American School Systems
Their Eyes Were Watching God Research Paper
To Kill A Mockingbird
Welfare State
What Is Sociology?
Women education
World Bank Report 1999 & World Development Report 2000/2001