Affirmative Action Free Essays

Affirmative action is a platform that was established by the government as a set of laws and policies for preventing discrimination against individuals. It was for the purpose of offering equal opportunities for employment, education, and business. Several of our formal Presidents has signed executive orders that was meant for all hiring to be equal regardless of race, color, or national origin with all government contractors and the other specifically for associations which received federal contracts and subcontracts eliminating discrimination within the workforce towards individuals centered on their race, color, religion, and national origin. We will write a custom essay sample on Affirmative Action or any similar topic only for you Order Now Later the affirmative action was modified to include no discriminating against one’s sex. Affirmative action also established preferential handling for minorities and women in the hiring process and the chance to receive a higher education. Affirmative action holds private employers accountable as well.During the Civil Rights movement, affirmation action was a tool that proposed opportunities for women and minorities and to provide equality for them. There are noted changes in how colleges recruit and enroll students, housing and also how using public transportation where now blacks can sit anywhere since Rosa Parks. Since affirmative action was primarily intended on improving chances for African Americans in employment and education, but there is still a low percentage of improvement that is why an executive order was signed and it required all government and private industry jobs to increase the number of women, disable individuals and minorities to either receive employment or to have the ability to gain an education or have additional training for work enhancement. There are numerous organization that uses affirmative action and equal employment opportunity policies within their business structure there is still a controversy today surrounding these issues. Are the equal employment opportunity and affirmative action policies have the same meaning? Let’s talk about equal employment opportunity first, the definition is that it bans all types of discrimination. This means that no matter the race, or gender everyone has the same chance of obtaining and getting promotions as well as training within the workforce. Whereas, affirmative action focus on past discrimination acts which were meant to give women, disabled individuals, and the minorities an equal footing in gaining employment and a higher education.It was to create equality between the workers and employers however it has caused extra adversity in the workforce. Because many believed that jobs held by whites were being jeopardized. Has affirmative action been consistently and effectively used to create a more robust and productive workforce? I would say yes; affirmative action has made it possible for many to see and earn their desired goals such as their life dreams. I feel that there are still many obstacles but if one applies themselves there are no limitations. Barak Obama was our nation’s first black President and there are many who hold prominent leadership roles that also includes women. Recently in the news, it was announced that the FBI, for the first time in history that there may be a woman heading this department.Though affirmative action has come along way there are those who still discriminate and don’t offer equal chances for others to succeed. Affirmative action has allowed the workforce to become more diverse in races, genders, and cultures. We must remember that the affirmative action is not about letting minorities to get into college or to get a job, but it’s about giving qualified individuals no matter their race a chance that they may not get otherwise.In conclusion has affirmative action been consistently and effectively used to create a more robust and productive workforce? I would say yes it has worked extremely well. I hope to see it continue because there are many more who could benefit from this program. How to cite Affirmative Action, Papers Affirmative Action Free Essays As much as we desire diversity, it will not occur if left to chance. We educate ourselves when we learn to interact with people of different colors and nationalities. During the last election, the majority of Americans voted for an African American President. We will write a custom essay sample on Affirmative Action or any similar topic only for you Order Now Why then do we continue to use affirmative action to fight inequality? It is not so easy to wipe away centuries of inferiority, shame, and scars, by simply anointing one minority to the highest position in the land. It will take positive steps to increase the representation of minorities in the areas of employment and education. One of the disadvantages of affirmative action is bypassing the very people that the program was designed to help because it was created on the basis of race not socioeconomic preferences, a failure that has undermined the nature of equality. The criticism that affirmative action is an unfair reward given to minority students because of their skin color, points to one of the disadvantages of ending affirmative action, which begs to ask if the end actually justifies the meanns. However, if skin color is used to discriminate against African Americans, then the same skin color must be used to level the playing field, and give African Americans a better shot at the American Dream. For African Americans to achieve this dream, the myths about affirmative action must be dispelled. One of the most controversial issues about affirmative action is the argument that the program uses quotas. According to Ethnic Majority (2012) â€Å"Affirmative action programs should: a) verify that inequities exist, b) set goals to eliminate the inequities, c) set timetables to meet the goals, d) disband the program after the goals are met.† If a company like Verizon for example, knows it has huge disparity between African Americans and the general population in its workforce, then the company may use affirmative action in its recruiting efforts to identify how many African Americans to hire, and then determine the levels and timeframe to hire them. Glazer, N. (1973) states â€Å"Goals or targets must be set on the basis of an estimate of the relevant labor pool for each underutilized group. † Opponents of affirmative action may argue that Verizon is setting a goal, and thereby instituting a quota. If that were true, Verizon would have to mandate that Call Center Supervisor jobs must go to African Americans or a specific number of African Americans must be hired, for that would be instituting a quota. What any company should do is comply with the affirmative action programs through its efforts more so than its results. Using affirmative action to set goals and target is not the same as using it as a quota. Affirmative action also has one important objective, to equalize opportunities in a system rive with inequality. Opponents of affirmative action calls it reversed discrimination. According to Kangas, S. (n. d. ), â€Å"those who use the term â€Å"reversed discrimination â€Å"are actually engaging in moral absolutism, a completely unworkable concept that has never been practiced by any society in history. † Steve Kangas has a compelling argument. Let us suppose that the government pass a law that no one person can forcefully take a property from the possession of another. However, one day, a person goes to a neighbor’s house with a gun and forcefully takes the property of his neighbor. Having identified the culprit, the neighbor called the police. The person who took the property refuses to give it back, whereupon the police pull their guns to forcefully retrieve the property. It would be illogical for the person who took the property from his neighbor to claim that the police broke the law for forcefully removing the property from his possession. Conversely, it is not reversed discrimination to seek to reconcile the injustices and terrible atrocities that include slavery and the refusal of the rights of women and minorities to vote.  (Kangas, S. n. d. ). It is like saying that the person who forcefully removes his neighbor’s property can evoke moral absolutism in order to avoid giving it up. The same logic makes the reversed discrimination argument invalid because correcting injustice is neither immoral nor against the law. The question of fairness is what makes affirmation action controversial. The program suffers a setback when the Supreme Court ruled against using race to integrate schools in Parents v Seattle and Meredith v Jefferson cases. A bitterly divided court did rule 5-4, â€Å"that programs in Seattle and Louisville, Ky. , which tried to maintain diversity in schools by considering race when assigning students to schools, are unconstitutional† (Yardley, W. and Lewin, T. , n. d. ). In spite of this setback, both sides of this argument have yet to answer all the important questions surrounding fairness. Education is the primary means of upward social mobility in America, and the fact that its costs have skyrocketed to such unprecedented levels means that only a select few can afford such a  luxury. (Larity, 2010). If on the basis two applicants, one white and one black, both applying for one job, or a place in college, should the black applicant’s race be used as one of the factors in his favor? What about that white person? Would he not be denied a job or a place in college if the black applicant’s race were used as a decisive factor? These are deeply troubling questions, and of all minorities, African Americans are acutely sensitive to them, having lived through difficult conditions, and denied equal rights for over 300 years.† In 1896 the Supreme Court sanctioned legal separation of the races by its ruling in H. A. Plessy v. J. H. Ferguson, which held that separate but equal facilities did not violate the U. S. Constitution’s Fourteenth Amendment† (Library of Congress, n. d. ). President Johnson in his commencement speech in 1965 said that equality of opportunity required more than simply ending discrimination. He felt that affirmative action could be interpreted in such a way that it would assure equality.  (Affirmative Action, n. d. ). Affirmative action might be seen as injustice to some, but the absence of fairness is in itself, an injustice to those who have been denied equality for so long. Through affirmative action, public policies and practices were designed to increase the presence of minorities in the competition of life where they have been historically excluded. The forbiddance of education for African Americans had deep roots in American history. In Virginia for example, the 1847 Virginia Criminal Code forbid any white person to assemble Negros for the purpose instructing them to read or write, an infraction that was punishable by confinement in jail and monetary fine. It was under this code that Margaret Douglass, of Norfolk, Virginia, a former slaveholder, â€Å"was arrested, imprisoned, and fined when authorities discovered that she was teaching â€Å"free colored children† of the Christ’s Church Sunday school to read and write† (Library of Congress, n. d. ). Many U. S. Presidents have weighed in and put their stamps on the issues surrounding affirmation action. In 1941, President Franklin Roosevelt issued an Executive Order to remove discrimination of African-Americans in the employment opportunities. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy passed Executive Order to provide indiscriminate employment opportunities and equal treatment of the employees, irrespective of a person’s race, color, origin, and creed. In 1971, President Richard Nixon gave the contractors of construction industries, incentive to hire minority. In 1983, President Ronald Reagan, passed an Executive Order to implement Minority Business Enterprise development. In 1995, President Bill Clinton, declared his full support for affirmative action by restoring economic opportunity. In 2000, President George W. Bush said that using race to include or exclude people from higher education†¦ is divisive. However, the Supreme Court gave its support to the issue of compensation for past discrimination in university admissions and declared it, constitutional. (Brunner, B. , n. d. ). In spite of the efforts by former U. S. Presidents to influence affirmative action during their terms in office, the program continues to go through many radical changes, and today, opponents believe that it is time the affirmative action law changed. The proponents of affirmative action made a mistake by simply focusing on race than the disadvantages of the program. If an institution that uses affirmative action cannot claim to bring white, black, and other minority students to the same leveled playing field, then the institution is simply creating a system that is solely depended on racial categories. Even Dr. Martin Luther King understood the disadvantages of today’s affirmative action when he said, â€Å"Many white workers whose economic condition is not too far removed from the economic condition of his black brother will find it difficult to accept special consideration to the Negro in the context of unemployment, joblessness, etc. and does not take into sufficient account their plight (that of the white worker)† (Larity, 2010). Another disadvantage that is often not talked about is instituting a program like affirmation that is based on race rather than socioeconomic level of all applicants. This has given the wealthy among the minorities an opportunity to exploit the program. A minority student who comes for a wealthy family takes advantage of the program because of race, and thereby splitting up the minority population as a wealthy minority student rise higher in the social ranks, than a poor minority student who slips further into abject poverty. (Larity, 2010). The losers of course are the forgotten poor white students who face similar difficulties in employment and education inherent in poverty, and are yet they received no help because of race. Dr.  Martin Luther King said it best, â€Å"It is a simple matter of justice that America, in dealing creatively with the task of raising the Negro from backwardness, should also be rescuing a large stratum of the forgotten white poor. † (Larity, 2010). For this reason, many white parents and supporters of affirmative have joined other less privileged minorities in a match to Washington to support affirmative action. (See Appendix 1). Opponents of affirmative action may argue that the goals of affirmative action have been met, and the time has come to disband the program and change the law. After all, an African American has achieved the ultimate or intended goal of the affirmative action program. The assertions that the current leader of the free world, President Obama was admitted to Columbia University despite undistinguished grades, became a U. S. Senator despite a mediocre record in Illinois, and was given a free pass in 2008 when he became the first African American President because American people wanted to bring historical diversity to the position (Education News, n. d. ) are utterly without merit disingenuous. It is true that under the constitution, equal protection is guaranteed for all citizens. Where the issue lies is the distinction that is based on race, and programs that critics of affirmation believe cannot pass constitutional muster until â€Å"the identified interest is served with the least harm to those who have not suffered discrimination† (Richardson, A. 2008). President Clinton once stated that affirmative action should not go on forever. In his remark, he suggested that we determine â€Å"what affirmative action is and what it isn’t† (Affirmative Action, 1995). Minorities have, for so long, been considered inferior and less capable than their white counterparts have. Affirmative action program afforded African Americans the opportunity to prove that given a chance, they were just as capable, and a young black man from Hawaii can in fact become the leader of the free world. That is what affirmative action is. What it is not, is the argument that affirmative action had nothing to do with Colin Power and Barack Obama achieving their respective positions. The point that should not be missed is that affirmative action made it possible to change stereotypes, and will continue to change as long as the program is not completely changed. The solution to the affirmative action problem will only be found when we come to the realization that it is not an issue of race, but rather an issue of class. Universities are not racist – their eagerness to comply with the directives of affirmative action clearly demonstrates this fact. by instituting a program of socioeconomic affirmative action, we will be aiding great numbers of poor minorities (whose poverty, not race, puts them at a disadvantage),  and at the same time we shall extend this aid to the hordes of poor white people who have been neglected, as well. Unless action is taken and affirmative action programs are altered to work on the basis of socioeconomic level, America’s poor – black, white, and Latino alike – will continue to be denied the means of upward mobility It is true today that an African American man called Barack Obama sits in the oval office, and he even nominated an opponent of different race that he narrowly defeated to a cabinet position. Given the pervasiveness of racial discrimination, a white man applying for a job, or a place in college, may not have engaged in any racial prejudice in his life. Although, he may be unaware of it, but by dints of his color, he has enjoyed a social, economic, and psychological advantage that has given him a head start in the competition of life. Politicians and the court must not depart from their earlier position of support for affirmative employment and admission. Sometimes resistance to discrimination takes so many forms that only rigid numerical rule like affirmative action can overcome it. If given the opportunity, children of color are capable of achieving their individual goals, not by receiving inferior education in public schools that are poorly funded, but by giving them the opportunity to compete on a level playing field with their privileged counterparts. It is clear that ethnic minorities are significantly under represented at selective institutions, and that something must be done to change this. However, it also holds true that to give an advantage to one student over another simply on the basis of race undermines the very nature of equality. When examined from this perspective, it appears that this controversy will never be decided to everyone’s satisfaction. Removing racial barriers to educational opportunities can only increase equity in education. Affirmative action is a tool that must be used to, not only achieve equal opportunity, but more importantly, to attain diversity. How to cite Affirmative Action, Papers Affirmative Action Free Essays Affirmative action is a practice that is intended to promote opportunities for the â€Å"protected class† which includes minorities, woman, and people with disabilities or any disadvantaged group for that matter. With affirmative action in place people of this protected class are given an even playing field in terms of hiring, promotion, as well as compensation. Historically, affirmative action is only known to have protected African Americans and woman; however that is not the case. We will write a custom essay sample on Affirmative Action or any similar topic only for you Order Now Affirmative action protects a variety of people and without this statute many people included in this protected class would be unfairly discriminated against. There are many reasons why affirmative action should continue to be a part of workplace such as: †¢Fosters diversity. †¢Educates our workforce on diversity. †¢Equips employees to achieve their highest contribution to the mission. †¢Challenges employees to make their maximum contribution to the mission. †¢Encourages employees to offer differing views and suggestions toward achieving organizational goals. †¢Respects and appreciates individual differences. †¢Provides equitable treatment and opportunities. †¢Creates and maintains an inclusive approach to all systems, policies, and practices (i. . , promotions, performance ratings, awards, training, assignments, and access to services). †¢Facilitates culture change to support wider diversity. People who are opposed to affirmative action often argue that it gives an unfair advantage to any member of this protected class; however that is far from the case. Affirmative action programs do not give racial preferences nor create quotas. In fact affirmative action programs are flexible therefore creating a legitimate selection process in the hiring aspect of the workplace. Although not in the workplace, an example of a flexible affirmative action program was seen at Ohio State University where they adopted the 10 percent rule. This rule admits students who are in the top 10% of their high school graduating class. Doing so allows colleges to take minorities who excel in marginal urban schools. This is a very legal way in ensuring minorities an even playing field (Campus that Looks like America). Because of the effectiveness of affirmative action other statues have been put into place to ensure that other members of this protected class are not getting discriminated against such as the Rehabilitation Act. The Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which makes it unlawful for certain employers to discriminate against a qualified individual exclusively by reason of her or his disability. The Rehabilitation Act does not specifically address medical inquiries, although it provides that the judicial standards used to determine whether an employer has unlawfully discriminated shall be the standards applied under the ADA. This is merely one of many statutes that were created as a part of affirmative action to promote equal employment. Clearly, with all of the mandates that were branched off of affirmative action the need for this program in the workplace is vital. Affirmative action promotes diversity which is known to be a vital part of any company’s success. Many companies even the U. S Government pride their selves on diversity and use various affirmative action programs to achieve such a company culture. For example the U. S. Census Bureau recently conducted a case study regarding the issue of diversity. The Census Bureau defines adversity as the all of the ways in which we differ. Among these dimensions are race, gender, age, disability, religion, sexual orientation and child/elder care responsibilities. The United States Government in acted a program within the Census Bureau in 1994 under the leadership of President Clinton, in hopes that he could build â€Å"a government that looks like America. † Further, he stated that: â€Å"Diversity transcends race and gender, affirmative action and Equal Employment Opportunity. It must encompass a fundamental appreciation of one another and a respect for both our similarities and our differences. It must include a heartfelt respect in attitude and in behavior towards those of different race, gender, age, sexual orientation, ethnicity and those with disabilities — all the facets that make each individual the unique and precious resource that each of us is. † In conclusion affirmative action is a vital part of society because it gives everyone a fair opportunity succeed regardless of race, gender, ethnicity or background. It also provides diversity in the workplace which will accurately reflects the community. . â€Å" Works Cited Merritt, J. (2002, March 10). Wanted: A Campus That Looks Like America – Businessweek. Businessweek – Business News, Stock Market Financial Advice. Retrieved September 4, 2012, from http://www. businessweek. com/stories/2002-03-10/wanted-a-campus-that-looks-like-america Jacobs, Roger. â€Å"Disability Discrimination, Reasonable Accommodation, and the Modified Commute. † 36. 4 (2011): 59-68. Print. Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO): Policy Statements. (n. d. ). Census Bureau Homepage. Retrieved September 10, 2012, from http://www. census. gov/eeo/policy_statements/ Why Affirmative Action is Necessary in the Workplace Lawrence Smith James Lee Andrea Willis How to cite Affirmative Action, Papers Affirmative Action Free Essays â€Å"An action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination, especially in relation to employment or education† – affirmative action, also commonly referred to as the paradox positive discrimination. 1 Affirmative action was designed as a temporary measure to insure a â€Å"leveled playing field† for all Americans specifically minorities and women. The affirmative action measure was created to be a catalyst in ending racial and gender discrimination in the workplace and was to be retracted once the presumable â€Å"playing field† was leveled. We will write a custom essay sample on Affirmative Action or any similar topic only for you Order Now However, through various flaws and shortcomings in the policy, it grew into a form of reverse discrimination where individuals that were well qualified for positions were turned down in lieu of minorities. When it was created, the affirmative action policy was a necessary step in insuring equality for all, but twenty-first century America has many restrictions and guidelines to prevent employers from discriminating against someone based on their race, gender, religion and national origin, proving affirmative action to be irrelevant. The essayist chose this topic because of her interest in the diversity of America’s current workforce. After various courses in economics as well as a course on public policy she became interested in programs designed to enhance social welfare in the United States of America. Also with growing concerns of immigration and the dwindling of whites as a majority in the United States, the topic of changes in the American workforce are sure to arise. The idea of affirmative action has drawn many supporting and opposing views since President John F. Kennedy first introduced it 1961 with the Executive Order number 10925. The order commanded all federal contractors (the public sector) to take â€Å"affirmative action to ensure that applicants are treated equally without regard to race, color, religion, sex or national origin. 2 As years went on, the progressive Civil Rights’ movement evolved the idea of affirmative action and called for it to encompass all public and private sectors in the United States. Affirmative action had many supporters including the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission that was created to insure equal opportunity in the workplace for all Americans. The idea of positive discrimination was rejected in the 1978 landmark court case Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, where the United States Supreme Court ruled that race could not be used as an admission standard to a university and â€Å"disadvantaged minority students† were not permitted to have admission spots reserved for them. Supporters of affirmative action believe that aiding those who have been historically disadvantage will insure the end of the cycle of poverty and call for a justified wealth distribution throughout the United States. It is statically proven that on average, minorities are less wealthy than whites. 4 Statistics also prove that individuals in low-income households are less likely to receive a college education therefore making them unqualified for most jobs in America’s current workforce. This cycle continues as these unqualified workers who were not able to get high paying jobs have children who are subsequently born into low-income households. In order for this cycle to discontinue, a policy should be put in place that will provide them an advantage over the wealthy white job seekers; the affirmative action policy provides this advantage. Sacrificing the well being of white males for a short period of time in order to catapult minorities and women into becoming qualified employees is a belief that many supporters of affirmative action hope for. Although the affirmative action policy was meant to be a temporary aid, a decade after it was created it morphed into a hypocritical attempt to fix a solution. College students from St. Norbert College, believe that â€Å"[it‘s] really justifying racism by it’s own actions. Its policies totally judge people solely on skin color and gender. That is discrimination in itself. †6 Those in opposition of affirmative action believe that it is not fair to discriminate against someone that has worked hard to become qualified for a job position. They believe that other programs such as scholarships and extra tutoring programs for the underprivileged are better solutions to solving inequality in the workplace. Once minorities become equally educated and acquire skills for jobs in today’s workforce, they will inherently level the playing field on their own. The issue of affirmative action has acquired many praises and oppositions. From when it was enacted over fifty years ago, it has transformed into a controversial subject. Although this topic was more relevant during the period of the Civil Right’s Movement, it has recently gained momentum with the growing minority population. How to cite Affirmative Action, Papers