Affirmative Action

[k]

But that's already illegal.



So racism isn't really racism unless it's the same scale of racism that has already been dealt with and put down in this country?

What I was referring to was the misnomer of calling AA "reverse racism." IOW, just because some Af. Am., or Asian, or Native American may get a job because of AA it does not mean that white person will not get a job...it just won't be in that particular slot.

Should we just pretend that the problems of racism will work themselves out and all this government interference has just excacerbated the problems of racism? Obviously, I'm not a fan of Sowell's views.

 

[Jetgirl]

What I was referring to was the misnomer of calling AA "reverse racism." IOW, just because some Af. Am., or Asian, or Native American may get a job because of AA it does not mean that white person will not get a job...it just won't be in that particular slot.

Or, as in my FH's example, they may eliminate the position entirely instead of risk being hauled into court because they chose a qualified white man over an unqualified black woman for the position, a position which had been five years in the making and had a lot of work put into it by a number of variously-colored/sexed/aged people.

Should we just pretend that the problems of racism will work themselves out and all this government interference has just excacerbated the problems of racism? Obviously, I'm not a fan of Sowell's views.

The problem of racism as it remains will not be solved by government forcing the examination of race into business practices.

All it does is make people like me, who are actually not racist, start to doubt the capabilities of minorities who we suspect were placed there to avoid "racism" but who may be completely underqualified.

Diminishing returns, Neverstop.

 

[k]

Or, as in my FH's example, they may eliminate the position entirely instead of risk being hauled into court because they chose a qualified white man over an unqualified black woman for the position, a position which had been five years in the making and had a lot of work put into it by a number of variously-colored/sexed/aged people.



The problem of racism as it remains will not be solved by government forcing the examination of race into business practices.

All it does is make people like me, who are actually not racist, start to doubt the capabilities of minorities who we suspect were placed there to avoid "racism" but who may be completely underqualified.

Diminishing returns, Neverstop.

emphasis mine

In my experience, that has been one of the myths about AA overall...AA states VERY CLEARLY ALL candidates MUST be qualified for the job. Some racist business owners have PURPOSEFULLY hired under-qualified people to satisfy the AA quota, but do so by NOT following the AA guidelines...IOW...they violate the AA guidelines to show AA does not work! It's ludicrous.

Any candidate who is not qualified for the job cannot take a company to court over AA issues.

 

[Jetgirl]

Any candidate who is not qualified for the job cannot take a company to court over AA issues.

And some companies cannot afford even to start the proceedings to spend 60k on lawyers, court costs and missed work by witnesses so that the court can determine that the plaintiff has no case to begin with, much less the muck in public relations.

"Having no grounds" doesn't mean "not going to court". At least as long as a lawyer stands to make a buck off it.



What is also going to happen, and is already happening in my FH's workplace due to this occurance and others, is that women, and especially black women are looked at as "whiners", "troublemakers" and underqualified, overprivledged wastes of space. Good luck to a really qualified black woman, NOW she's going to need it, she would have been fine a year ago.

Another AA sucess.

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

It is a complete misnomer and myth to say that AA is "reverse racism" because it does not even come close to the racism whites have placed on African-Americans in the US.

Just because it doesn’t equal it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. It just means that it is racism to a lesser degree. That doesn’t make it right.

If the US doesn’t torture prisoners at Abu Griab as badly as Saddam did, does that make torture OK ?

What I was referring to was the misnomer of calling AA "reverse racism." IOW, just because some Af. Am., or Asian, or Native American may get a job because of AA it does not mean that white person will not get a job...it just won't be in that particular slot.

But it doesn’t matter. They still got excluded. At an individual level that person was the subject of racism. If a black person was “excluded” from a job based upon race, but managed to get another job, should they just accept it?

 

[Trogdor the Burninator]

In my experience, that has been one of the myths about AA overall...AA states VERY CLEARLY ALL candidates MUST be qualified for the job.

So next week I interview 10 candidates for an IT analyst position. All of them are qualified. The best person for the job, in my determination, happens to be a white male.

But AA says that I should take the black female I placed as second best this time, to “even out the playing field”. After all, she’s also qualified. Just not as good as the first guy.

Still racism.

 

[BrownCoat]

If the US doesn’t torture prisoners at Abu Griab as badly as Saddam did, does that make torture OK ?

That's not torture. That's gay S&M pr0n.

 

[praying]

All it does is make people like me, who are actually not racist, start to doubt the capabilities of minorities who we suspect were placed there to avoid "racism" but who may be completely underqualified.

Do you know who has been placed due to AA? Are you in human resources? Those would be the only pepole who should know such information.

 

[sethad]

That's not torture. That's gay S&M pr0n.

saddam sending kids feet first through woodchippers while their parents watched and having people get holes burned into their bodies etc etc was gay S&M porn??

what the...

I dont think you know what you're talking about.

 

[BrownCoat]

saddam sending kids feet first through woodchippers while their parents watched and having people get holes burned into their bodies etc etc was gay S&M porn??

what the...

I dont think you know what you're talking about.

No.

Abu Grahb was Gay S&M porn.

 

[Jetgirl]

Do you know who has been placed due to AA? Are you in human resources? Those would be the only pepole who should know such information.

That's the point. Just the knowledge that it's a possibility, and being exposed to situations in which businesses capitulate to race to avoid lawsuits is enough to make other workers (or students) suspicious.

 

[praying]

That's the point. Just the knowledge that it's a possibility, and being exposed to situations in which businesses capitulate to race to avoid lawsuits is enough to make other workers (or students) suspicious.

Then I would say you are coming in with preconceived notions. Clealry AA policy is for placing/promoting qualified indiviuals in the work force so what are you basing this on?

 

[Jetgirl]

Then I would say you are coming in with preconceived notions. Clealry AA policy is for placing/promoting qualified indiviuals in the work force so what are you basing this on?

It's not so clear to me that it's about placing/promoting QUALIFIED individuals in the work place.

So far I've also heard that it's about paying back the abuses of slavery, and to promote diversity.

So what it is?

 

[praying]

It's not so clear to me that it's about placing/promoting QUALIFIED individuals in the work place.

The policy of AA is regarding qualified individuals.


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.

Affirmative Action is covered under executive order 11246

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.

So far I've also heard that it's about paying back the abuses of slavery, and to promote diversity.

So what it is?

Affirmative Action is not to pay back abuses of slavery, it is/was to address the vast discrimiantory practices in the labor market and higher education. In higher education it is also used to promote diversity.

The mere passage of anti-discrimiantion laws was not enough to stop actual discrimination, as has been noted it is not an easy thing to prove and the EEOC website statisitcs bear that out, if anyone has taken the time to look at them. So what could be done to help ensure a more level playing field, the insistence that employers/colleges institute policies and programs that clealry show a willingness to hire, promote and grant access to higher education facilities to women,. minorities and the disabled.


Who is covered by EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Commission:

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) enforces all of these laws. EEOC also provides oversight and coordination of all federal equal employment opportunity regulations, practices, and policies.

Under Executive Order 12067, EEOC has responsibility for enforcing all Federal EEO laws and the duty to coordinate and lead the Federal government's effort to eradicate workplace discrimination.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) cover all private employers, state and local governments, and education institutions that employ 15 or more individuals. These laws also cover private and public employment agencies, labor organizations, and joint labor management committees controlling apprenticeship and training.

www.eeoc.gov

I really think reading the government websites regarding these subjects helpful

 

[k]

Just because it doesn’t equal it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. It just means that it is racism to a lesser degree. That doesn’t make it right.

If the US doesn’t torture prisoners at Abu Griab as badly as Saddam did, does that make torture OK ?

But it doesn’t matter. They still got excluded. At an individual level that person was the subject of racism. If a black person was “excluded” from a job based upon race, but managed to get another job, should they just accept it?

That is exactly what it means...it is not racist because it does not oppress whites as a group.

This is one problem with the last part...there is a presumption of a level playing field. This is a very complex issue and we cannot exchange the macro for the micro, or the converse, and arrive at a satisfactory conclusion.

If Aff. Act. oppressed whites, as a whole group, then I would be totally against it.

 

[k]

So next week I interview 10 candidates for an IT analyst position. All of them are qualified. The best person for the job, in my determination, happens to be a white male.

But AA says that I should take the black female I placed as second best this time, to “even out the playing field”. After all, she’s also qualified. Just not as good as the first guy.

Still racism.

Are they all equally qualified?

How big is the company?

What is the AA quota for a company of that size and income?

What is the racial dimension of the company?

If they are equally qualified, and the most important factor is job performance, then why should it matter if AA says the company has to hire the Af. Am. female?

Again, it is not racism because it is not against whites as a group and the white male who did not get the job would have a MUCH easier time getting an equitable job in another company.

 

[Billnew]

A quick look at the number of minorities in high-ranking job positions would seem to show that affimative action has not yet done its duty.

Try finding an American male Doctor. They are the minority.

Why is "reverse" descrimination ok, when descrimination isn't.

Shouldn't all people be "judged by the content of their heart"(and mind) then by their minority status(pro or con)?

Isn't it wrong to be refused service because of the color of your skin?(black, white, red, green, blue, what ever color there is?)

"A mind is a terrible thing to waste" or is it"a black mind is a terrible thing to waste?"

I have heard this when calling about a job in the Arizona Sheriff's department,
"we have no openings....Are you a minority?"
NO
"We have no openings for non-minorities."
Why is it a federal crime if they leave off the word NON, but perfectly fine
to descriminate against "Non minorities"?

 

[k]

Try finding an American male Doctor. They are the minority.

Is this claim based on any evidence that could be shared w/ the rest of us?

 

[TScott]

Try finding an American male Doctor. They are the minority.

Why is "reverse" descrimination ok, when descrimination isn't.

Shouldn't all people be "judged by the content of their heart"(and mind) then by their minority status(pro or con)?

Isn't it wrong to be refused service because of the color of your skin?(black, white, red, green, blue, what ever color there is?)

"A mind is a terrible thing to waste" or is it"a black mind is a terrible thing to waste?"

I have heard this when calling about a job in the Arizona Sheriff's department,
"we have no openings....Are you a minority?"
NO
"We have no openings for non-minorities."
Why is it a federal crime if they leave off the word NON, but perfectly fine
to descriminate against "Non minorities"?

None of this has anything to do with AA. As has been pointed out numerous times on this thread AA is nothing but a guidline to companies and colleges that accept federal funding, period. The AA statute clearly states that it is not about setting any kind of quotas.

The "Arizona Sheriff's department", whatever that is (what? They have a statewide sheriff?), most likely does not fall under federal AA rules, they probably have their own hiring practices, however I am highly doubtful that your claim is true.

The thing of it is, AA for education is extremely important, and fair. If society is not going to properly fund public high schools in low income areas, which are inhabited almost exclusively by minorities, then it seems very unfair to hold these kids to the same standards on entrance exams as kids who have had the benefit of well funded schools.

 

[MethodMan]

None of this has anything to do with AA. As has been pointed out numerous times on this thread AA is nothing but a guidline to companies and colleges that accept federal funding, period. The AA statute clearly states that it is not about setting any kind of quotas.

From the federal level - Actual Gov't contracts set minimum participation for minorities. Most regional authorities (such as NYCTA) go as far as requiring a certain level of minority-owned business participate as subs.