Skip Nav
What Is It Like to Be in an Open Marriage? 1 Woman Shares Her Story
Popsugar Pride
24 Songs That Will Add Some Oomph to Your LGBTQ Pride Month Celebration
There's Literally a Video Game About Hot Dads Dating Other Dads and People Are Hyped

Three States Consider Banning Affirmative Action

Three States Consider Banning Affirmative Action: Right Move?

With one comment John McCain made Sunday that he supports an Arizona initiative that would ban hiring practices that favor one group over another McCain has brought attention to similar calls in two other states. He said that the initiative gives "the people of Arizona the opportunity to end preferential treatment based on race, sex, ethnicity, or national origin by state or local governments."

Arizona, Colorado, and Nebraska are all considering ballot initiatives that ban affirmative action hiring practices. Sunday's comment combined with one 10 years ago where McCain called affirmative action "divisive" shows the anti-affirmative-action campaign is gaining steam toward their ultimate goal of getting "either the Supreme Court or the Congress to get the policy changed at the national level."

The crux of the argument being debated in the initiatives is whether it's a ban on discrimination or an attack on programs that help women and minorities. Which do you think it is?


Join The Conversation
bellaressa bellaressa 8 years
I have no idea why this post became about black people, when AA helps other minorities including white women. But, very interesting how you can turn it against a race of people and then call them lazy.
Kelliegrl Kelliegrl 8 years
A very optimistic outlook my friend
True-Song True-Song 8 years
Well, some people come here just to post outrageous things just to get a reaction. Once you realize who those people are, you can just ignore them. I assume it's not their real opinion and just something they say to get a rise out of people.
bellaressa bellaressa 8 years
I completely agree Krradford.
Kelliegrl Kelliegrl 8 years
"Some people decided to stop posting here because they didn't like the tone of the conversations on the comments." Definitely agree on this one. There's been a lot of outright rudeness and ignorance on Citizen's boards lately and to me it isn't even worth commenting on most of the time. A couple of weeks ago (I think it was on a thread about victims of Katrina hurricane. I maybe wrong though), but one of the regular posters told Black people, that we needed to get off our lazy a$$es. And then proceeded to tell another poster "if the shoe fits." To me that was rude and offensive and I reported the comment to be flagged. It's a free country and people can be rude and ignorant if they choose to live in that world. However, comments like that throw the thread off topic and don't advance the conversation in any way. Anyway, I said what I needed to say for the week.
True-Song True-Song 8 years
>The poorest people in America are (Southern) whites, so let's just clear that up to begin with. CItation for that?
bellaressa bellaressa 8 years
It finally posted, no problem stephley---let me know your thoughts when you had time to process.
stephley stephley 8 years
Ooh Bella, something to read at lunchtime! I've copied it all so I can print and take it outside. Thanks.
rabidmoon rabidmoon 8 years
"Well, it would be nice if we could start by agreeing that there is not an epidemic of lazy, illiterate, surly minorities being hired over kindly white gentlemen with masters degrees due to quotas, but even that seems like it would be a battle." Precisely...! As long as its so easy for people to make such gross, sweeping generalisations about AA, its all the more reason it should remain in place. Imperfect, yes, but until someone comes up with a better way of ensuring that people act without bias towards gender, race, etc - the idea of not having AA again seems a step in the wrong direction. Its just far, far too easy for people to be blind to what is widespread in their own country and rely instead on the occasional anecdotes to back up their beliefs.
bellaressa bellaressa 8 years
You can also check this out at your local library: The Wealth and Asset Holdings of U.S.-Born and Foreign-Born Households: Evidence from SIPP Data. Author Info Deborah A. Cobb-Clark Vincent Hildebrand
bellaressa bellaressa 8 years
Also, this is a good paper and even has research from 1989 -2001
bellaressa bellaressa 8 years
I also found this: : Racial and Ethnic Differences in Wealth and Asset Choices by Sharmila Choudhury * Summary of article: White households in the United States are far wealthier than black or Hispanic households, a disparity that remains unexplained even after taking into account income and demographic factors. This article uses data from the Health and Retirement Study to examine various components of aggregate wealth, including housing equity, nonhousing equity, financial assets in general, and risky assets in particular. It inspects asset choices by race and ethnicity and assesses whether differences in saving behavior--and, consequently, in rates of return on assets--are possible sources of the wealth gap. It also demonstrates the equalizing effect of pension wealth and Social Security wealth on total wealth.
bellaressa bellaressa 8 years
Nylorac can you tell me where you found your information ---I am interested in finding b/c I found this below: Figures on inheritance tell much the same story. According to a study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, only 1.6% of Americans receive $100,000 or more in inheritance. Another 1.1% receive $50,000 to $100,000. On the other hand, 91.9% receive nothing (Kotlikoff & Gokhale, 2000). Thus, the attempt by ultra-conservatives to eliminate inheritance taxes -- which they always call "death taxes" for P.R. reasons -- would take a huge bite out of government revenues for the benefit of less than 1% of the population. (It is noteworthy that some of the richest people in the country oppose this ultra-conservative initiative, suggesting that this effort is driven by anti-government ideology. In other words, few of the ultra-conservatives behind the effort will benefit from it in any material way.) The fact that most Americans have little or no wealth except for their house can be seen in the following bar graph from the Census Bureau. Coming as it does from a bureau carefully monitored by the White House, the report from which this information is drawn studiously avoids any discussion of the concentration of wealth by talking in terms of "median" household wealth. "Median" means that 50% of households have more and 50% of households have less than the figure on the graph, so the top is nowhere in sight. Nonetheless, the graph is highly revealing. Notice also that this graph shows that black and Latino households have far less wealth than do non-Hispanic whites, whether we are talking about wealth in general or just home equity.
nylorac nylorac 8 years
The poorest people in America are (Southern) whites, so let's just clear that up to begin with. Affirmative action is starting to also be seen as a 'detriment' to the Asian community, and not only the white, as more admissions offices in universities are starting to admit non-Caucasian and non-Asian peoples.
bellaressa bellaressa 8 years
Well all the info I provided you ladies was flagged. It will show up one day.
bellaressa bellaressa 8 years
Ladies, For federal contractors and subcontractors, affirmative action must be taken by covered employers to recruit and advance qualified minorities, women, persons with disabilities, and covered veterans. Affirmative actions include training programs, outreach efforts, and other positive steps. These procedures should be incorporated into the company’s written personnel policies. Employers with written affirmative action programs must implement them, keep them on file and update them annually. Facts on Executive Order 11246 — Affirmative Action Revised January 4, 2002 A. OFCCP Mission Description The Department of Labor's Employment Standards Administration's Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP) enforces the Executive Order 11246, as amended; Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended and the affirmative action provisions (Section 4212) of the Vietnam Era Veterans' Readjustment Assistance Act, as amended. Taken together, these laws ban discrimination and require Federal contractors and subcontractors to take affirmative 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.  OFCCP’s jurisdiction covers approximately 26 million or nearly 22% of the total civilian workforce (92,500 non-construction establishments and 100,000 construction establishments). The Federal Government awarded more than $179 billion tax-payer dollars in prime contracts in Fiscal Year 1995.  OFCCP requires a contractor, as a condition of having a federal contract, to engage in a self-analysis for the purpose of discovering any barriers to equal employment opportunity. No other Government agency conducts comparable systemic reviews of employers’ employment practices to ferret out discrimination. OFCCP also investigates complaints of discrimination. In Fiscal Year 1999, OFCCP conducted 3,833 compliance reviews. Moreover, OFCCP programs prevent discrimination. Further information about the OFCCP programs may be obtained from the Internet. B. Operation of the Executive Order Program. The EEO Clause Each contracting agency in the Executive Branch of government must include the equal opportunity clause in each of its nonexempt government contracts. The equal opportunity clause requires that the contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian or Pacific Islander, Black, and Hispanic individuals are considered minorities for purposes of the Executive Order. This clause makes equal employment opportunity and affirmative action integral elements of a contractor’s agreement with the government. Failure to comply with the non-discrimination or affirmative action provisions is a violation of the contract. A contractor in violation of E.O. 11246 may have its contracts canceled, terminated, or suspended in whole or in part, and the contractor may be debarred, i.e., declared ineligible for future government contracts. However, a contractor cannot be debarred without being afforded the opportunity for a full evidentiary hearing. Debarments may be for an indefinite term or for a fixed term. When an indefinite term debarment is imposed, the contractor may be reinstated as soon as it has demonstrated that the violations have been remedied. A fixed-term debarment establishes a trial period during which a contractor can demonstrate its commitment and ability to establish personnel practices that are in compliance with the Executive Order. If a matter is not resolved through conciliation, OFCCP may refer the matter to the Office of the Solicitor of Labor, which is authorized to institute administrative enforcement proceedings. After a full evidentiary hearing, a Department of Labor Administrative Law Judges issues recommended findings of fact, conclusions of law, and a recommended order. On the basis of the entire record, the Secretary of Labor issues a final Administrative Order. Cases also may be referred to the Department of Justice for judicial enforcement of E.O. 11246, primarily when use of the sanctions authorized by the Order is impracticable, such as a case involving a sole source supplier. The regulations implementing the Executive Order establish different affirmative action provision for non-construction (i.e., service and supply) contractors and for construction contractors. C. Executive Order Affirmative Action Requirements i. For Supply and Service Contractors Non-construction (service and supply) contractors with 50 or more employees and government contracts of $50,000 or more are required, under Executive Order 11246, to develop and implement a written affirmative action program (AAP) for each establishment. The regulations define an AAP as a set of specific and result-oriented procedures to which a contractor commits itself to apply every good faith effort. The AAP is developed by the contractor (with technical assistance from OFCCP if requested) to assist the contractor in a self-audit of its workforce. The AAP is kept on file and carried out by the contractor; it is submitted to OFCCP only if the agency requests it for the purpose of conducting a compliance review. The AAP identifies those areas, if any, in the contractor’s workforce that reflect utilization of women and minorities. The regulations at 41 CFR 60-2.11 (b) define under-utilization as having fewer minorities or women in a particular job group than would reasonably be expected by their availability. When determining availability of women and minorities, contractors consider, among other factors, the presence of minorities and women having requisite skills in an area in which the contractor can reasonable recruit. Based on the utilization analyses under Executive Order 11246 and the availability of qualified individuals, the contractors establish goals to reduce or overcome the under-utilization. Good faith efforts may include expanded efforts in outreach, recruitment, training and other activities to increase the pool of qualified minorities and females. The actual selection decision is to be made on a non-discriminatory basis. ii. For Construction Contractors OFCCP has established a distinct approach to affirmative action for the construction industry due to the fluid and temporary nature of the construction workforce. In contrast to the service and supply affirmative action program, OFCCP, rather than the contractor, establishes goals and specifies affirmative action which must be undertaken by Federal and federally assisted construction contractors. OFCCP issued specific national goals for women. The female goal of 6.9 percent was extended indefinitely in 1980 and remains in effect today. Construction contractors are not required to develop written affirmative action programs. The regulations enumerate the good faith steps construction contractors must take in order to increase the utilization of minorities and women in the skilled trades. D. Goals, Timetables & Good Faith Efforts . The numerical goals are established based on the availability of qualified applicants in the job market or qualified candidates in the employer’s work force. Executive Order numerical goals do not create set-asides for specific groups, nor are they designed to achieve proportional representation or equal results. Rather, the goal-setting process in affirmative action planning is used to target and measure the effectiveness of affirmative action efforts to eradicate and prevent discrimination. The Executive Order and its supporting regulations do not authorize OFCCP to penalize contractors for not meeting goals. The regulations at 41 CFR 60-2.12(e), 60-2.30 and 60-2.15, specifically prohibit quota and preferential hiring and promotions under the guise of affirmative action numerical goals. In other words, discrimination in the selection decision is prohibited. i. Examples of Affirmative Action Programs OFCCP federal affirmative action in action is exemplified by the EEO programs of the award recipients of the Department of Labor Secretary's Opportunity 2000 Award and Exemplary Voluntary Efforts (EVE) awards. Each year, these awards are given to contractors with outstanding affirmative action programs. Affirmative action refers to the aggressive recruitment programs, mentoring, training, and family programs that work to recruit and retain qualified individuals. Corporate programs nominated for a Secretary 2000 or EVE award include innovative outreach and recruitment, employee development, management development and employee support programs. Past Secretary's Opportunity 2000 award recipients include:  The Rouse Company (2001)  Union Bank of California (2000)  Eli Lilly and Company of Indiana (1999)  United Technologies Corporation of Connecticut (1998)  Pacific Gas and Electric of California (1997) In addition, the Department recognizes other exemplary federal contractors through its EVE awards and exemplary EEO efforts of community organizations through the EPIC awards. ii. Successes OFCCP efforts benefit real people through systemic contractor investigations and through partnerships with private industry and state and local agencies.  In general, OFCCP programs helped many Fortune 1,000 companies and other major corporations break the glass ceiling for women and minorities. In 1970, women accounted for 10.2 percent of the officials and managers reported on the Employer Information Report (EEO-1) form submitted by federal contractors. In 1993, women were 29.9 percent of all officials and managers, according to the EEO-1 data.  Many minorities and women have gained access to employment on large construction projects because of the Department's construction mega-projects. For example, on the Oakland Federal Building project, eight percent of the hours worked on the site were by women. On the New York Federal Courthouse project, 35 percent of the hours were worked by minorities and approximately six percent by women. In addition, OFCCP has recognized the affirmative action efforts of award recipient construction contractors like the Hyman Construction of Manhattan, New York and the Law Company of Kansas.  Working women moved from welfare to forklift operator jobs and other non-traditional construction jobs in Philadelphia and Chicago through OFCCP outreach efforts.  Native Americans are now employed on federal highway construction projects in conjunction with the Council for Tribal Employment Rights and the Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe. Both received Department EPIC awards for their efforts.  More than 70 individuals with disabilities have been employed in computer positions in Columbus, Ohio through a partnership between the department and Goodwill Industries. This cooperative agreement has resulted in prototypes of workplaces specifically designed to welcome persons with severe disabilities.  After highly publicized cases in which veterans were unaware of job openings, a Seattle company hired a specialist to address Vietnam-era veterans' issues.  Because of affirmative action requirements, federal contractors are reviewing their employment policies, including compensation systems, and training their managers and supervisors to identify and correct discrimination and harassment in the workplace. Following are real people who have benefited from federal affirmative action, according to the Council of Presidents’ Women Speak Out: Affirmative Action Resource Guide:  Bernadette, of Washington, DC., works as a carpenter because of a federal affirmative action program. She is an African-American single parent with two children, who says "because the company had an affirmative action program, I got on the job site."  Janice became an astronaut with NASA at the Johnson Space Center in July 1991, because of NASA’s affirmative action program. She has since logged over 438 hours in space. She describes the NASA equal employment opportunity policy: "Under NASA’s developing equal opportunity and diversity policies, all hiring and advancement decisions are based on individual qualifications and merit, but recruitment and development programs are structured such that high-quality candidates are available to help achieve a representative workforce."  Paulette is now an Officer of NYNEX, responsible for Marketing in Maine, New Hampshire, Rhode Island and Vermont. She says that "Without NYNEX’s willingness to actively pursue affirmative action goals, my talents and skills would have never taken me this far in the business world."  Lisa is a laborer in Hammond, Indiana, employed at an expansion project. Before she entered the trades, she worked for $5.00 an hour, without benefits as a seamstress. She now earns over $20 an hour with benefits. She says that without affirmative action, she would probably still be working for $5.00 an hour and have no opportunity for advancement.  Judy is a journey structural ironworker and single parent of two teenage sons in Chicago, Illinois. Before entering the trades, she worked two jobs, with no room to advance. She credits her new job to affirmative action and says "employers will not hire without affirmative action." She was one of 20 women in her union of 2,321 members.  Kathy worked in the skilled trades in Chicago, said "the affirmative guidelines allowed me to earn a higher wage than all of the service jobs that I had worked before. Working construction gave me the confidence and strength to know that I could excel in any field if given the opportunity." OFCCP uncovers examples of discrimination every day during its compliance evaluations, including the following incidents:  A hostile working environment at an aircraft maintenance facility, including racial slurs, sexually inappropriate statements, graffiti on bathroom walls, offensive drawings in the workplace, and racial jokes.  Black professionals required to scrub toilets and subjected to racial harassment.  An individual with a disability (Native American amputee) was subjected to verbal harassment because of his disability, physically assaulted, and denied benefits and opportunities provided his non-disabled colleagues. Affirmative action is necessary to prevent discrimination and to address stereotypical thinking and biases that still impede employment opportunity. Overall findings from a DOL survey found that women advanced more quickly in contractor firms than in non-contractor firms. Federal contractors have changed the corporate climate in ways that are not statistically measurable because of the requirements of Executive Order 11246 and other laws enforced by OFCCP. For example, corporations now post job announcements and do not rely solely on word of mouth recruitment. Corporate sensitivity to issues like sex and race harassment and wage discrimination has increased, as has the awareness of the benefits of a family friendly environment. Employers now view ability, not disability. Excerpts from Department's EVE awards: "Equal employment opportunity is good for business." United Technologies Corporation, Hartford, CT October 1, 1998 Secretary's Opportunity 2000 Award Honoree "When you do the right thing by people, it's usually the right thing for business." Jim Adamson, Chief Operating Officer United Space Alliance, Houston, TX Oct. 1, 1998 EVE Awards Great book: Affirmative Action Guidelines: An Appropriate Response. Author: Leach, Daniel E.,M1 Check out websites: From Persistence of discrimination in hiring (Wilson, 1995) • In 1990, an Urban Institute study comparing pairs of black and white job applicants with identical credentials found that 'unequal treatment of black job seekers was entrenched and widespread, contradicting claims that hiring practices today either favor Blacks or are effectively color blind.' • A study in 1995 of university faculty hiring practices found that, in many instances, once a minority hiring goal was met, departments stopped seeking minority applicants. Many ceased recruiting minorities (e.g., by pulling their ads from minority publications) regardless of the number of vacancies that occurred from then on. What has been the impact of affirmative action on society? Proponents view affirmative action as one of the most effective ways to address the long-standing problems of racism and sexism in our country, thus serving as a vehicle for reaching the American goal of equality (Pratkanis and Turner, 1995). The following findings by Murrell and Jones (1995) serve as evidence of the perceived success of affirmative action: • Affirmative action policies have resulted in increases in the representation of women and minorities across all levels of employment in the United States and within organizations that were once exclusively male. • Affirmative action has led to higher employment participation rates, increased earnings, and gains in educational attainment for women and minorities. Does present-day racism justify maintaining affirmative action? Psychologists and other social scientists have documented the many forms of racism that continue to mar marketplace employment decisions. Today these forms of racism are more evident in less overt yet widely held beliefs, attitudes, and prejudices than they were in the past. The subtle nature of these forms of racism suggests that passive EEO programs may not be sufficient to prevent discrimination. Contemporary, more indirect, forms of prejudice can be divided into two types (Dovidio and Gaertner, 1995). • Aversive racism refers to negative feelings that lead to avoidance but are likely to be justified by some other reason. For example, a white male television station manager fails to hire a black applicant for the position of news anchor because he fears the audience will not respond to a black news anchor, but he justifies his decision by saying it was based on economics. • Symbolic racism refers to the development early in life of negative feelings people have toward members of other groups. Such feelings persist into adulthood and are associated with beliefs that are expressed symbolically rather than overtly (e.g., in opposition to busing). Aversive racists typically do not evaluate Blacks more negatively than Whites, but they usually rate Blacks less favorably than Whites (Dovidio and Gaertner, 1995). • Discrimination is more likely to occur when Blacks compete for jobs or promotions with Whites who hold similar qualifications. The same holds true when highly qualified women compete with highly qualified men. • Aversive racism is more likely to affect minorities adversely when the latter attempt to advance to positions superior in rank to those held by Whites. Affirmative action is essential for combating the effects of subtle forms of racism for a number of reasons (Dovidio and Gaertner, 1995). • Affirmative action is outcome-based; issues of intention are not central to the issue. • Affirmative action involves systematic monitoring of disparities in employment practices toward different groups. • When they are successful, affirmative action programs lead to the establishment of clear norms by organizations and institutions regarding the importance of full equality for everyone in the workplace. ________________________________________ What are the judicial standards for evaluating affirmative action? The U.S. Supreme Court has documented a set of procedural standards for evaluating the constitutionality of affirmative action policies (Nacoste, 1995). • The procedural weighing standard allows race to be used as a factor, but not the only or major factor, in the design of affirmative action programs. Bakke v. University of California (1978). • The procedural effect standard states that affirmative action procedures within an organization must be appropriate to a documented level of discrimination in the targeted segment of the organization. City of Richmond v. J. A. Croson (1989); Aderand v. Peña (1995). Several Supreme Court cases have set out the conditions under which affirmative action programs have been judged to be inconsistent with these two standards and, therefore, unconstitutional. Studies show that resistance to affirmative action policies and feelings of stigmatization among its recipients are the direct result of the way employers implement these types of procedural practices (Nacoste, 1995). For example: • Putting more weight on race than on employment qualifications results in feelings of unfairness among majority group members and the consequent stigmatization of recipients. • When race is taken into account as one of many factors affecting job opportunities, majority group members are more likely to feel that programs are fair and recipients are less likely to feel stigmatized. What are the major criticisms of affirmative action? Many people argue that affirmative action has caused reverse discrimination against Whites. However, a 1995 analysis by the U.S. Department of Labor found that affirmative action programs do not lead to widespread reverse discrimination claims by Whites. In fact, a high proportion of such claims filed were found to lack merit. The analysis found that fewer than 100 out of 3,000 discrimination cases filed actually involved reverse discrimination, and in only six cases were such claims substantiated (Wilson, 1995). Critics of affirmative action usually believe that people should be selected for positions based on merit alone. The reality is that most, if not all, hiring decisions involve some sort of unspoken preferential treatment. Sometimes the decision is based on a personal connection or relationship; sometimes it is based on likability or comfort level (Wilson, 1995). In fact, the Federal Glass Ceiling Commission (1995) confirmed that white men tend to be more comfortable with, and therefore more likely to hire and promote, other white men, thus revealing the prevalence of racial- and gender-based preferential treatment. Opponents of affirmative action argue that these policies move America away from the goal of achieving a color-blind society. Yet, as Justice Harry Blackmun noted in the Bakke case, 'In order to get beyond racism, we must first take account of race.' A color-blind society cannot exist in the face of racism or prejudice that continues in the workplace. Some critics state that young minorities joining the workforce expect that affirmative action will get them promotions. This charge is one of the most serious, but there are no data to support this notion. Many people argue that affirmative action stigmatizes recipients. Although the data support this contention, it should be acknowledged that stigma and negative stereotypes associated with race and gender existed in this country long before affirmative action was implemented. This does not mean that stigma and negative stereotypes are acceptable, but rather that they exist independently of affirmative action. There are, however, steps that can be taken to reduce stigma, as noted in the answer to the next question. ________________________________________ In what ways can affirmative action be more effective? Organizations can put into practice some of the following general principles that research has shown to improve the effectiveness of affirmative action and remove the preferential selection stigma (Pratkanis and Turner, 1995). Improve effectiveness • Establish unambiguous, explicit, and focused qualification criteria to be used in selection and promotion decisions. • Communicate these requisite criteria clearly. • Assure that selection procedures are perceived as fair by relevant audiences. • Emphasize the recipient's contributions to the organization and his or her specific competencies. • Establish the conditions under which employees, including affirmative action recipients, must cooperate to meet organizational goals. • Monitor the affirmative action program to see what works and what does not. Decrease the level of stigmatization • Inform others both in the workplace, and in society, in general, about the recipient's qualifications. • Inform others of the discriminatory barriers operating in the situation. • Limit the appearance of prejudice and discrimination in the workplace. ________________________________________ Is affirmative action doomed to fail because the prejudices it seeks to overcome are so strong? This is not so, as pointed out by Pratkanis and Turner (1995). • Not all the help offered by affirmative action is self-threatening and implies inferiority. For example, help directed at a burdensome situation as opposed to help directed to an individual demonstrates social support and concern with long-term change. • Affirmative action that focuses in both word and deed on the proactive removal of discriminatory barriers and the promotion of social institutions supporting positive intergroup relations will result in greater success than passive policies. ________________________________________ Are affirmative action recipients less qualified than those persons who are not its recipients? Although anecdotes can be traded, there is little evidence to suggest that there is any truth in the perception that affirmative action recipients are less qualified than their colleagues (Pratkanis and Turner, 1995). • Two field studies of manufacturing and police organizations did not find any drop in organizational performance as a result of implementing affirmative action policies. • Formal performance appraisals of minorities in work organizations do not find significantly lower performance of these workers compared to Whites. • Some case studies have found unexpected positive benefits to organizations that have implemented affirmative action. ________________________________________
Roarman Roarman 8 years
"the people of Arizona the opportunity to end preferential treatment based on race, sex, ethnicity, or national origin by state or local governments." This is the whole reason we have affirmative action, because preferential treatment was being given to whites. It's called Racism people, and affirmative action was put in place to combat racist practices in hiring employees and admitting students to learning institutions. As racism and sexism is still prevalent, getting rid of affirmative action would be a huge set back.
True-Song True-Song 8 years
Well, it would be nice if we could start by agreeing that there is not an epidemic of lazy, illiterate, surly minorities being hired over kindly white gentlemen with masters degrees due to quotas, but even that seems like it would be a battle.
Jillness Jillness 8 years
Good point, Torg. I was trying to find a good source on the subject, but only things like Wikipedia and Stanford came up, but they were talking more about origins, and not how it is regulated today. It is probably because it varies from state to state. How is the country supposed to have a productive discussion about AA if we all have different interpretations about what we think it means?
True-Song True-Song 8 years
Haha, seriously.
stephley stephley 8 years
A lot of that hearsay sounds like radio talk show hosts to me.
True-Song True-Song 8 years
>Not to be rude...but I feel like we are all talking about what we know about Affirmative Action from hearsay... I agree. It's hard since I don't think there is one nationwide program.
Jillness Jillness 8 years
"Some people decided to stop posting here because they didn't like the tone of the conversations on the comments." Which is quite funny considering they were the top posters of the months repeatedly. If they only want to have conversations with like-minded individuals, that is cool. I prefer to have discussions with a wide variety of opinions, but to each his own!
Jillness Jillness 8 years
I think AA could factor in financial status, because we use tax returns to base many programs on. Tax returns are a universally accepted representation of income, although offshore accounts and things of that nature allow loopholes. No program will ever be perfect, but I do think there is a place of reference. Not to be rude...but I feel like we are all talking about what we know about Affirmative Action from hearsay...and not actually about what the specific programs actually do, and how they are regulated. I wish there were more facts, and not just generalizations. Does anyone have a good source?
lavieenrose lavieenrose 8 years
No problem organicsugr, I totally understand where you're coming from.
Funny #ThingsThatLeaveBritainReeling Tweets
Undocumented Father Detained by ICE
Adam West Dead
Collagen Smoothie at Jamba Juice
From Our Partners
Latest Love
All the Latest From Ryan Reynolds