FREE ESSAY ON AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

Affirmative Action: Reverse Discrimination? 
Affirmative Action is a hot issue in the United States, with wide differences of opinion
over the correct way to expand opportunity for people who have historically been
discriminated against. With the philosophical difference behind the legal and political
tensions is deep. One side wants a total rollback of affirmative action programs, making
individual merit the only criterion for hiring and promotional considerations. While the
other extreme wants affirmative action to be pushed until the racial makeup of all
professions mirrors the racial makeup of US society exactly. While both these sides are
to the greatest ends of the argument there needs to be an approach to come up with a
medium. This could include laws to force companies to vigorously recruit and develop
minorities for professional and managerial jobs. However, there should not be any
outright quotas, which reserve a certain number of slots for particular minority groups.
This will cause resentments and constitutional obstacles down the road. The objective
here is not to do away with affirmative action in one sweep, rather to seek out
strategies to help promising minorities and match them with opportunities they have
rightfully earned and deserve. 
Now, what does the law say? Although Title VII has an affirmative action component part
of it, most regulations stem from a requirement imposed by Executive Order 11246. There
are a lot of misconceptions about affirmative action and what laws companies actual have
to follow. One is that all companies are required to adhere to the laws under affirmative
action, this is not the case. Executive Order 11246 states that once a company enters
into a contract with a federal governmental agency that exceeds $10,000 it must abide by
the affirmative action rules and regulations. These regulations include, but are not
limited to, the following: to post in a conspicuous place, available to all applicants,
provisions of the nondiscrimination clause; include in contractor's advertisements that
all qualified applicants will receive consideration without regard to race, color,
religion, gender, or national origin; include statements of these obligations to all
subcontractors; and furnish all information and reports to the Secretary of Labor for
purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with the executive order and its
regulations. In addition to the above regulations if a corporation enters into a contract
of $50,000 or more additional requirements are put in place. A Corporation must develop a
written action plan within 120 days of the beginning of a governmental contract. They
must also perform a workforce analysis, which must indicate how many women and minorities
are in job categories ranging from unskilled workers to managerial employees. These are
the basic rules and regulations companies and corporations must follow in order to be
within the compliance of the law.
There have been several major court decisions that have helped define the application of
the statutes and regulations. One of the biggest and earliest cases was that of Regents
of the University of California v. Bakke. This case was not against an individual's
employer rather against a university. Bakke applied to Davis for two consecutive years
but was rejected on both occasions. In both years, applicants with lower scores than
Bakke were admitted due to a special admit program. Davis had a program that says
applicants who are not of minority status are totally excluded from a specific percentage
of the seats in the entering class. When the State's distribution of benefits hinges on
the color of a person skin, that individual is entitled to a demonstration that the
challenged classification is essential to promote a tangible state interest. For this
reason the court's judgment was that Davis' special admission program was invalid under
the Fourteenth Amendment. Another case, that did deal with the employer-employee
relationship, was United Steelworkers of America, AFL-CIO v. Weber. In this case a white
employee sued because his employer adopted a voluntary affirmative action plan reserving
for black employees fifty percent of the openings in a training program. Because the
company had put in place a voluntary program to eliminate an apparent racial imbalance
the Supreme Court held that the program was permissible and did not unnecessarily trample
the rights of white employees. These are just a couple of the more prominent cases that
have help set the standards for future cases involving affirmative action. 
There are several regulations in place that penalize corporations for not following
affirmative action rules and regulations. These penalties for noncompliance can range
from a slap on the hand to major penalties and fines. The publishing of the names of
nonconforming contractors is a minor penalty. Some other more serious penalties are as
follows: recommending proceedings be instituted under Title VII; the Attorney General
bringing suit to enforce the executive order; recommending the Department of Justice that
criminal proceedings be initiated; canceling, terminating or suspending the contract; and
debarring the contractor from entering into future government contracts. These penalties
were enforced during the case of Local, 28, Sheet Metal Workers v. E.E.O.C. The court
imposed that a 29% nonwhite membership goal be meet by a certain date and a $150,000 fine
be placed in a fund intended to expand nonwhite membership in the apprenticeship program.

In order for these penalties to be avoided there are several steps management should take
to be in compliance with the law. First, ensure that hiring, promotions and training are
open and fair to all that apply. Work with both unions and employee groups if an
affirmative action plan is to be but in place to get early approval from all
constituencies affected. Make sure voluntary plans meet judicial requirements. So all
employees understand the plan, provide periodic training explaining the purpose and the
intent of the plan. Training is the easiest way to deter a lot of misconceptions that
employees have about affirmative action. If affirmative action is handled in the proper
way everyone, minorities, females and whites, wins in the long run.