Positive and Negative Results of Affirmative Action Legislation - Essay Example

? Affirmative Action Understand Affirmative Action Legislation Contrary to claims of affirmative action opponents that nothing motivates opportunity for equal employment, the opposite seems to be true. The responsibility for implementing non-discrimination in employment has been shared in different times by the US civil service commission and its successor the office of personnel management in establishing employment policies and maintaining merit principles in the workforce. As well, the equal employment opportunity commission applies non-discriminatory policies for government as well as private employment; moreover, the office of federal contract compliance in the department of labor ensures that compliance in companies doing business with the country’s federal government. US commission on Civil rights serves as an overall advisor as well as a watchdog and the country’s civil rights division within the department of justice bears the responsibility of enforcing non-discrimination statutes. Nevertheless, the dispersion of responsibilities in agencies with different agendas affected the process of affirmative action implementation. However, all the agencies were concerned with application of non-discriminating policies to the various segments of the US economy despite the rise of various jurisprudence disputes even within their spheres of action; besides administrative actions were related and affected other spheres. By the turn of the twenty-first century, a small number expressed support for racial discrimination after the civil rights movement progressed from obscurity during the civil war to mid-twentieth century activism to the current accepted wisdom. The non-controversial part is the reactive policy that ensures non-discrimination based on race, religion, color, sex and national origin in social, economic and educational affairs. The non-discrimination laws are designed to make sure that individuals are never judged by color of skin, but rather by the content of their character and incase a violation occurs, such individuals are entitled to remedies (Lee, 1999). Positive and Negative Results of Affirmative Action Legislation Affirmative action seems to have a short history though it is a hands-on policy that makes special efforts about employment decisions, entry into college and other public behavior as a means of compensating for past discrimination. Affirmative action bases on the thought that various groups of people even without being discriminated against currently, any individual belonging to such groups are disadvantaged in the workplace and in campuses as a result of the past discrimination aimed at the group. Therefore, affirmative action attempts to level the playing ground for all categories of citizens thought it emphasizes on disadvantaged groups as opposed to injured individuals. Affirmative action can refer to a court-ordered, remedial programs designed to correct effects of discrimination documented in court. Proponents of affirmative action hold that affirmative action provides long-term cure for discrimination by offering victims chances to show their skills and worth, which eventually changes prejudicial attitudes. Nevertheless, opponents of this controversial program argue that affirmative action never addresses the cause of inequality and the program can create labor market inefficiencies and result in reverse discrimination. Therefore, both sides suggest that effective affirmative action would cause minority employment to increase however; the sides disagree on whether this raise is efficient and on whether it would be sustainable if affirmative action ended (Lee, 1999). Currently there is small opportunity to measure the impact of eradicating affirmative action programs. As Federal, support for enforcement faded and flowed, the Supreme Court ruling in the past decade chipped away at affirmative action making it difficult to confirm whether concurrent changes in minority outcomes are due to affirmative action policy or other trends in inequality. A similar dilemma plagued attempts to measure impacts of instituting affirmative active in the early years. However, early studies tend to indicate that affirmative action positively affected employment and advancement of racial minorities. Studies of affirmative action in late 1970s and beyond demonstrated gains in racial minorities where it affected minorities more in skilled compared to unskilled occupations. Moreover, firms that used affirmative action tended to recruit and hire more minorities and women (Lee, 1999). Though affirmative action brought benefits through employment gains and advances in occupation, it however masked underlying loses in efficiency. While effects of affirmative action on the efficiency of the market are not wholly understood, present evidence never suggests a large decline in productivity. Affirmative action aids increase diversity in the work environment, which in turn offers businesses two essential advantages that include increased adaptability regarding problem solving by providing a wide array of probable solutions. Moreover, organizations embracing multi-cultural employees are well off to serve diverse communities since they can conquer language and cultural barriers. In addition affirmative action increased opportunities for minorities as well it provides enterprises a means of making moral commitment to the ideal equal treatment for all (Myers, 2007). Nevertheless, affirmative action has a main disadvantage that of reverse discrimination within the workplace. In essence, opponent of affirmative action claim that the program penalizes those in historically dominant groups even when they possess appropriate qualification. Though claims of reverse discrimination are rare, such accusations can generate negative social backlash for any company since it can undermine a company’s financial future. Moreover, affirmative legislation potentially creates stigma that members from a minority group and women obtain positions within a company based on race or ethnicity instead of achievement and qualifications. Post-racialism posit that racial minorities’ gains combined with presumed absence of modern discrimination against members of minority groups make measures aimed at rectifying racial inequality redundant and counterproductive. Opponents of affirmative action argue that such measures cause instead of curing racial divisions and resentment (Carter, 2012). Evaluation of Whether Affirmative Action Legislation is Still Appropriate Several court decisions have restricted the scope of federal protection against discrimination in employment. Critics of affirmative action imply that the Supreme Court frequently engages in judicial activism thus it often acts to counter main ways. It is argued that many disputes would be handled better through political processes as opposed to court processes. For instance, the Supreme Court in 1995 ruled that federal affirmative action policies targeting to benefit minorities should meet same strict standards as those present in state and local programs. A memorandum to government agencies was issued in 1996 addressing the impact of the court decision in federal employment and demanding agencies to instill four standards to affirmative programs. The four standards included making sure that there were no quotas both in practice and theory, no illegal discrimination including reverse discrimination, no preference for people unqualified for any job or other opportunity and stoppage of programs that met their objectives. Therefore, the Supreme Court’s colorblindness makes it difficult for minorities to achieve their goals through political processes and they reduced the original impact of affirmative action. Thus, the court rendered the process of offering minorities more opportunities unavailing or at least severely constrained. References Carter Jr., W. M. (2012). The Paradox of Political Power: Post-Racialism, Equal Protection, and Democracy. Emory Law Journal, 61(5), 1123-1152 Lee, R. A. (1999). The Evolution of Affirmative Action. Public Personnel Management, 28(3), 393 Myers, C. (2007). A cure for discrimination? Affirmative action and the case of California's proposition 209. Industrial & Labor Relations Review, 60(3), 379-396 Read More