What does the use of the Term Equality infer to in the Context of Employment - Essay Example

? What does the use of the Term “Equality” infer to in the Context of Employment? What is Equality? Over the years,there has been a lot of debate pertaining to equality in the workplace as numerous organizations endeavor to try and improve equality within their individual organizations. Equality can essentially be defined as being concentrated attempts geared at ensuring that the different concerned individuals have been treated in a fair and equal manner without showing any favoritism. This is regardless of their individual race, sexual orientation, needs, belief or religion, age or gender. Equality has also been variously described as not only attempting to try and treat everyone in a right and equal manner, but trying to treat various individuals in a manner that will ensure that the general outcome will be found to be similar for all the concerned individuals (Dautrich and Yalof 2012). Importance of Equality Equality is seen to not necessarily mean that that women should now be assigned more duties pertaining to construction labor or that their male colleagues should be assigned more secretarial functions. Equality is perceived to be critically important as most individuals are seen to be not contented to be perceived as being second class citizens as a result of there being some inequality in an organization. Without proper inequality in an organization, the employees who are seen to be given less than equal treatment will eventually shut down, distance themselves and reduce their overall productivity much to the detriment of the concerned organization (Academic, 2008). In the event that a given organization fails to implement measures designed to promote equality, there can naturally develop a subsequent exclusion of some of the employees as a result of some of their working in some of the marginalized situations (Kornblum and Smith, 2012). These employees are seen to tend to feel as if they are unable to function as an active part of the organization even if this was not the organization’s original intention. Organizations can be able to achieve a measure of equality by ensuring that the employees have been ably supported to be able to easily access the organizational resources and decision making. This can be further enhanced by ensuring that the employees are valued, recognized and adequately respected within the organization. Models of Equality There are a number of different models of equality that have been develop to aid organizations in ensuring that they implement policies and procedures that will ensure that they maintain utmost equality. Some of these Equality models are seen to variously include: Equal Opportunity as Equal Share (Radical Approach) Equal Opportunity as Equal Access (Liberal Approach) Equal Opportunity as Equal Treatment (Reactionary Approach) Equal Opportunity as Equal Share (Radical Approach) The equal opportunity as equal share approach that is popularly termed as being the radical approach is seen to try and seek to make a direct intervention in the workplace practices with the sole objective of attempting to try and achieve some form of a fair distribution of rewards among the organization’s employees as is primarily measured by some established criterion of worth and moral value. The radical approach emphasizes on justice and freedom being the collective responsibility of all the individuals involved within the organization. It can thus be see the radical approach is primarily concerned with the eventual outcome of the contest as opposed to the established rules of the game (Kumra, Manfredi and Vickers, 2011), it is characterized with being more concerned with the fair distribution of the rewards achieves as opposed to being more concerned with the actual fairness of the procedure. In line with this approach, Jewson and Mason (1986) are keen to argue that although discrimination tends to mostly affect specific individuals, it can nevertheless only be identified at the group level. In this respect, it is generally found to not be possible for a given society to be able to successfully determine whether it is an equal opportunity society without first having collected and analyzed economic data pertaining to some of the more discriminated groups. As a result of the fact that it has been established that women and black people are essentially the equals of men and whites respectively, the eventual actual distribution of the various occupational rewards should be able to reflect this fact. Jewson and Mason (1986), further point out that it is impossible to claim that equal opportunities happen to exist until the actual representation of women and black people in a society’s labor force is seen to reflect their presence as a whole. Theoretically, the absence of a fair distribution is in fact, clear evidence of unfair discrimination in an organization’s employment. Of note is the fact that the radical approach is seen to place no particular value on the outcome of the various free market process but instead believes that there happens to be some independent standards of human dignity and moral worth which must clearly take precedence, these can ideally be derived from various ideologies such as black power, feminism and Marxism Jewson and Mason (1986). Criticisms of the Equal Opportunity as Equal Share (Radical Approach) There are a number of criticisms that are seen to have been leveled against the radical approach to the securing of equal opportunity. Key among these criticisms is that any interventions to attempt to try and change the currently existing status quo within an organization might not be particularly well received. The employees might be too used to the currently existing system and might not be open to the changes that are seen to be advocated for by the radical approach. The radical approach is seen to strongly advocate for positive action but this might be wrongly be construed to mean as being special treatment. Rewarding employees for their performance might be viewed by some as being a form of tokenism, reverse discrimination or favoritism. As a result of its stating post approach that emphasizes that equality is primarily based on the notion that free competition should essentially start at the very point of access or entry, it has been pointed out that this can essentially be viewed as a manipulation of the outcomes that serves to leave the organization’s structures and cultures in an intact manner. This aspect is seen to not be in anyway conducive to the long agenda (Cockburn 1989; Cornelius 2002). Equal Opportunity as Equal Access (Liberal Approach) Equal opportunity as equal access approach that is also popularly referred to as the liberal approach to equality is seen to primarily emphasize on the removal of various unfair distortions to the labor market operations via the institutionalization of the fair procedures in all aspects pertaining to both employment and work. This approach seeks to try and institute fair rules or equal treatment as a general principle of equal opportunity, and involves rather limited positive actions measures. Under the liberal approach, every person is seen to be helped to be able to compete on an equal footing on the basis of their own individual talents (Ross, 2008). The approach ensures that it removes the sources of discrimination and positive action is seen to be limited to compensation in the event that an individual happens to be at a disadvantage. The liberal approach is seen to assume that individuals have the ability to act in an autonomous manner and make independent decisions. It is also seen to assume that the maintenance of free and open competition will eventually guarantee that there will be a fair outcome. It is seen to aim what has been variously described as being a metaphorical level playing field for all the various concerned individuals. It is seen to be based on the liberal democracy political ideals whereby all of a country’s citizens are seen to have universally acceptable standards of citizenship and justice. This approach is also seen to rely on the idea of equality as sameness and individuals are seen to both have access to, and be accessed within the organizational workplace as individuals regardless of their given social group (Kirton and Greene, 2012). Free market competition is seen to be generally advocated for as it is in line with the overall objectives of the liberal approach that seeks to achieve a fair distribution of resources within the market place. Discrimination is considered to not be an inherent characteristic of this approach but a severe distortion of the rational labor market. As such bodies such as the state are required to engage in efforts aimed at correcting this distortion and eliminating these obstacles to meritocratic competition and free market. This can include the provision of benefits such as welfare to the disadvantages individuals. To promote equality that is seen to be in line with the liberal approach within the workplace employment, it is possible for the organization to provide facilities such as childcare facilities at work. Criticisms of the Equal Opportunity as Equal Access (Liberal Approach) Jewson and Mason (1986), are keen to highlight the fact that the radical approach to equality makes an explicit attack upon the concept of talent and ability that is seen to be closely embraced by the liberal approach of equality. It asserts that as opposed to being morally and politically neutral terms, the terms talent and ability are seen to innately conceal and contains a series of value judgments that do not serve to promote equality in the workplace. It can be argued that these skills and behaviors that are being classified as abilities are invariably seen to be those of the ruling elite or ruling class. It is the prerogative of the persons in power to define the desirable skills and knowledge and it is these that are then eventually institutionalized into educational curricula. The radical approach is seen to also be quite conscious of not only the social definition of the term ability but also its transmission. Jewson and Mason (1986), point out that as a result of this attribute, it thus found to be quite in favor of work in sociology education and particularly so, that which happens to be concerned with the transmission of ‘cultural capital across the various different generations and the existing relationship seen to be between the social and cultural reproductions. In line with this analysis as proposed by the radical approach, talent and ability cannot there be reasonably conceived as being individual attributes and doing so, generally results in promoting inequality. Another criticism upon the liberal view is that the radical view greatly questions whether technical and educational qualifications which are commonly taken to be as being evidence of individual ability, should actually be considered as being a necessary function for the effective performance of most modern day occupations (Braham 1997). It is credibly argued that as a result of the deskilling nature of work in most capitalistic societies, most of the tasks entailed in most occupations do not essentially require any significant degree of knowledge or competence. This is found to be the case in most semi-skilled, unskilled manual, and routine white-collar occupations. It has invariably been proven that often times, the character of the educational qualifications demanded as an entry requirement in is seen to bear relatively very little relation to the task that is actually being performed. Jewson and Mason (1986) argue that in this instance, educational qualifications are seen to primarily act as screening devices that have been designed to aid in the preservation of the more desirable areas of a country’s labor market for the daughters and sons of the bourgeoisie. This is seen to serves to effectively inhibit any attempts at promoting equality in the workplace. Equal Opportunity as Equal Treatment (Reactionary Approach) The reactionary approach to equality is often seen to be the most common approach in use by most organizations. The main premise of this approach is seen to be that it requires that all people irrespective of the context be it within the society or the workplace employment to have the innate right to receive the very same treatment without any form of discrimination on the basis of any of the given criteria be it race, age, religion, nationality or disability (Freeman, Chinkin and Rudolf, 2012). In the same vein, all people are seen to essentially be entitled to equal protection of the laws and policies governing the given organization. Under this guideline, he state is also expected to secure equal freedom for all its individual citizens. An organization can be able to successfully attain equal treatment in its employment, if it is able to recognize that all people are inherently quite different and do not therefore share the very same starting point (Christiano, 2008). In line with the objectives of equal treatment, an organization should ensure that it is able to base all its various activities on the individual in addition to offering this individual the same treatment and opportunities that it is seen to offer the other people in the organization. While the reactionary approach is seen to recognize that the prejudices within societies, cultures and races still do exist, it is seen to try and offer a coping mechanism in the form of providing an opportunity to the discriminated elements to be effectively assimilated into the greater majority (Craig, 2007). By assimilating the discriminated elements into the greater majority, the reactionary approach is seen to essentially be trying to eliminate the existing discrimination by ensuring that all of the existing factors that might be perceived as being the root cause of the discrimination eventually fade away as the different factions eventually become one. It is also pointed out that the reactionary approach can be seen to have an apolitical nature as it is seen to generally not align itself or even borrow from the view of any political policies. It is this particular aspect of the reactionary approach that has served to cause it to become the most common approach used in ensuring that there is equality in most organizations. Criticisms of the Equal Opportunity as Equal Treatment (Reactionary Approach) The main criticism that is seen to commonly be leveled to the reactionary approach is seen to pertain to its assimilation policy as a tool to be used in elimination of discrimination. It has been argued that any attempts that are made at trying to correct existing discrimination by the use of assimilation only serves to greatly emphasize on the already stark differences and separateness (Arrighi et al, 2007). As such, the use of assimilation can be perceived to not be an effective tool in the reduction or eventual elimination of discrimination. Conclusion The quest for equality has over the years been picking up a rather considerable momentum that has seen it quickly emerge as a prominent issue in most organizations. Nowadays, organizations are currently seen to be trying to ensure that they constantly maintain equality in all their different processes ranging from recruitments for employment, through to promotions. In the event that an organization is perceived to not be providing equal opportunities in the employment of its workforce, this can result in its generally being seen cast in a very negative light as well as expose it to a large amount of criticism from various quarters. As such, it is critically important that all organizations ensure that they properly utilize the different theories of equality and incorporate the most suitable theory into their organization’s policies so as to ensure that they are able to avoid inequality in their employment. Bibliography Academic. 2008. World Of Work Report 2008. Academic Foundation. Arrighi, A. B. et al. 2007. Understanding Inequality : The Intersection of Race/Ethnicity, Class, and Gender. Lanham : Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. Braham, P. 1997. Racism and antiracism : inequalities, opportunities and policies. London [u.a.] : SAGE Publ. Christiano, T. 2008. The Constitution of Equality: Democratic Authority and Its Limits. Oxford University Press. Cockburn, C. (1989), Equal opportunities: the short and long agenda. Industrial Relations Journal, 20: 213–225 Cornelius, N. 2002. Building workplace equality : Ethics, diversity and inclusion. London : Thomson Learning. Craig, L. R. 2007. Systemic discrimination in employment and the promotion of ethnic equality. Leiden; Boston : Martinus Nijhoff. Dautrich, K. and Yalof, A. D. 2012. American government : historical, popular, and global perspectives. Australia ; United States : Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Freeman, A. M. and Chinkin, M. C. 2012. Beate Rudolf The UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women : A Commentary. Oxford : OUP Oxford. Jewson, N. and Mason, D. 1986. ‘The theory and practice of equal opportunities policies: liberal and radical approaches’, Sociological Review, 34(2): 307–34. Kirton, G. and Greene, A. 2012. The Dynamics of Managing Diversity. Routledge. Kornblum, W. and Smith, D. C. 2012. Sociology in a changing world. Belmont, CA : Wadsworth Cengage Learning. Kumra, S., Manfredi, S., and Vickers, L. 2011. Managing equality and diversity: theory and practice. Oxford : Oxford University Press. Ross, D. S. 2008. Women's Human Rights. University of Pennsylvania Press. Read More