Discrimination and Affirmative Action - Essay Example

Discrimination and Affirmative Action Discrimination is the prejudicial of an individual relying on their perceived or real membership in a group or by class (Hackerott, 2003). For example, gender, sexual orientation, race, ethnicity, religion and many other characteristics (Hackerott, 2003). Affirmative action is also known as a positive discrimination in the Germany. It refers to the policies taking factors, which includes the reasons similar to those gearing discrimination above like gender and sexual orientation.

Discrimination might occur to be of both positive and negative effect (Cekala, 1996). In Germany, the war veteran might face discrimination in a both positive or a negative way. The reason for implementation of the affirmative action is to meet the set goals, reduce discrimination, and show commitment to a firm and the members (Cekala, 1996). Affirmative action downsides have not resulted to an improvement status of a protected group such as gender and the disabled veterans of the DVAAP (disabled veterans affirmative action program) group in Germany (Hackerott, 2003).

People will always have a feeling that they have been judged and if one group is protected the other might feel that another group of people is creating conflicts among the minority group (Hackerott, 2003). Although the German court has restricted the use of gender and race in awarding several life advantages such as jobs, health care’s, college administration and many more advantages applicable to the war veterans, majority of people have been living and working against this rule (Cekala, 1996).

Affirmative action and discrimination in relation to gender and race are the main struggling point of view in Germany (Cekala, 1996). The government of Germany is required to build and affirmative action program, whereby it puts into consideration employment, recruitment, and finally the advancement of the disabled veterans (Cekala, 1996). The law requires agencies to develop an annual DVAAP plan (Hackerott, 2003). This program has discriminated against other several groups along it zeal to protect the disabled veterans, thus supporting the above point that discrimination might act as advantageous to them.

Technically most of the disabled veterans could come up with an argument that they need protection from the affirmative action because they have a believe that they are a part of the minority group (Cekala, 1996). In any case, the affirmative action issue will tend to become murky as it is put into consideration in high details (Cekala, 1996). In AA and DVAAP, disabled veterans, women and minorities are assumed to be inferior by many people thus are needed to be given an advantage that is extensive which is able to sustain a role that is meaningful in the society (Hackerott, 2003).

Attainment of certain skills and the pursuit of new opportunities could be better thus presenting a hand up as it is opposed to a hand out deontological consideration aside (Cekala, 1996). Utilitarianism will always show that this would be the best way to result to an even play field for all the involved in discrimination issues (Hackerott, 2003). Employment of tactics such as the quota system is normally based on the assumed inferiority, and it creates some set asides’ for several or certain groups of people, which in turn it excludes others thus creating discrimination (Cekala, 1996).

It will also create albeit in some other sectors of society if AA and DVAAP do act effectively on the present forms. The question that arises is what should be done to end discrimination in employment on their stead (Cekala, 1996). The issue on applying affirmative action directed to giving the veterans preference is justifiable in a sense that, these veterans had wasted all their time as militaries in the cost of self-development in terms of professionalism for the common gain and good of the country (Cekala, 1996).

The peace and happiness that most of people enjoy has been achieved due to the veterans they discriminate (Cekala, 1996). Most of these veterans got their disabilities in the war whereby some of the disabilities were as a result of professionalism development featured among the government posted jobs which are competitive (Hackerott, 2003). Discrimination is not good thou it might come with some privileges that one person might gain while the other loses them (Cekala, 1996). In reference to the utilitarianism school of thoughts, an action is good and appreciable if it is of common good without the factoring of the common interests (Hackerott, 2003).

Action of the veterans can be justifiable because they had placed aside most of their personal interests and rather opted to fight for their country in a process of protecting the citizens (Cekala, 1996). This is a goal of common good; thus this people should not be discriminated whatsoever. Affirmative action should be put into a consideration when it comes to the cases of the veterans (Hackerott, 2003). References Cekala, S. (1996). Military Retirement: Possible Changes Merit Further Evaluation.

New York: DIANE Publishing. Print. Hackerott, C. L. (2003). Duty Calls: Military Leave & Veterans Rights. New York: CCH Incorporated. Print.