The Advantages of Affirmative Action - Case Study Example

Affirmative action affiliation Affirmative action Introduction According to the research conducted by Sharma (2005) and Acton (2000), affirmative action can simply be referred to as the advocating of equality in society. Affirmative action can also looked at as positive movements aimed at increasing the representing number of women and minorities in areas of education, business and employment which they have been excluded for a long time (Sowell, 2004; Garrett, 2004). Since time immemorial, women have always been regarded as the lesser gender in almost all aspects of the economy. For a long time this gender stereotype has seen the women belonging to the lower ranks in the society below the male domination. As a result, a great percentage of them have been barred from decision making opportunities and also positions in society and school (Vidu, 1999). Apart from women, affirmative action seeks to change the perception of persons in relation to racism, ethnicity and gender. According to Sander (2004), discrimination on racial grounds is not a new scene in the world. The mostly racially abused group is the African Americans. Some years back, it was difficult and almost impossible for a black person to have equal opportunities in education, employment or business. Puddington (1995) emphasizes that affirmative actions tend to eradicate these issues in all levels of the society. This paper will focus on some of the advantages of affirmative action. Additionally, it will also cover critics of the affirmative action and detect instances where affirmative action has been useful. Over the years groups that have made initiatives in indulging in affirmative action have increased significantly. The rising numbers of these groups has given discriminated people hope of a better future. Moreover, in as much as people are not involved in affirmative action, there is a wide global support. One of the notable groups is the women. All over the world, women have the same aim of gaining equal opportunities in all sectors of the economy for instance, education, employment and business (Jacobs, 2004). It is evident that the process of empowering of women around the world has been a tune from the past decade. Due to this, there has been an upward trend on the rising number of significant figures in society working for the cause. An example is Oprah Winfrey. Oprah has been credited for her ability to instil confidence among many women in the quest to advance themselves and champion for their rights all over the world. However, affirmative action has critics who oppose these moves in all ways possible. Some people argue that legal practices and courts take positive action to the matter for the purpose of building their reputation. According to Skrentny (2004), some judges tend to make rules in favour of affirmative action groups sp that they can gain more support in their line of duty. Additionally, some affirmative action groups may use manipulation to gain what they need as well as gain attention. It is, nevertheless, vital to note that although affirmative action is for a positive cause in the society, misusing the attention they get is not a positive thing either (Orfield, 2001). In the course of time, affirmative action has risen to be the best tool to use in a court of law. This gives the people the assumption that affirmative action is more than legal practices. In modern society, there are the minority who try to gun down affirmative action. Their efforts have been futile since there is no court or counsel which will support any case against affirmative action. In the views of Ibarra (2001), the minority group does not aim to bring back issues of racism experienced in past years, but attempt to expose the other point of view apart from the affirmative action point of view. Schwartz (2009) indicates that, since the realization of affirmative action, the marginalized groups tend to take full advantage of the global support and gain society class and recognition. The major question remains whether the marginalized groups get too much attention. Some critics argue that the actions get too much attention while the affirmative action groups perceive it as a matter of gaining their rights to opportunities in society (Sowell, 2004). The existence of affirmative action has been taken by two paths. First, there is the legal and administrative path which includes legal processes and practices, and the relationship with the government and its executives. The other path is the path being held by the public debate (Ibarra, 2001). The legal institutions and the government carry out the implementation of the recommendations by affirmative action activists. Additionally, they are in the position to make rules in favour of affirmative action. The public debate has two sides, one in favour of affirmative action and the other against. It is undoubted that the two paths rarely agree on one solution, but with the power endorsed to them the path with the government and the legal backup always comes out triumphant. In words of Sander (2004), with the evolution of affirmative action, there were some factors given preferences. At first, affirmative action was aimed at gender equality and racism. This is because in the twentieth century women and African Americans were greatly discriminated in their quest for education and job opportunities (Tam & Basser, 2004). This is what led to the equality campaigns. In the twenty first century the focus shifted to ethnicity. At this time women had already established their wants but Hispanics and African Americans had not. The gender issue created a way for other marginalized groups to stand up and demand their rights. In the beginning, affirmative action was merely aimed at improving the institutional way of treating people of different colour. Furthermore, it was also intended to address the political and economical discrimination against people of a certain group who have previously been under represented and at present unrepresented in particular institutions (Skrentny, 2004). The sole beneficiaries of these programs were mostly women, poor people and people with disability. The discrimination based on race was very rampant in the United States. In 1991, a researcher working with ABC-TV decided to record the activities of one African American man and a white man in their workplaces (Sowell, 2004). On that day, the white man received services in all shopping malls, while the African American was ignored. In stores the white man also got discounts, whereas the African American paid the full price. The African American was denied the right of renting an apartment on the grounds of his race. In the business scene, the African American was turned down while the white man was given the opportunity to at least prove himself. Car dealerships were also on the spotlight when they offered a white man a cheaper deal than the African American. The same case applied in the streets whereby, a police car unnoticeably passed by the white man without any suspicion. When the police car approached the African American, it slowed down with the policemen giving him a suspicious look. The occurrence of this recording provoked fury among activists who believed in affirmative action. According to Jacobs (2004), the video was evidence enough to show the day to day life of African Americans living in the United States. Pros and cons One of the pros of affirmative action includes the creation of equal employment opportunities. In developed and developing countries it is punishable by law if one is denied employment opportunity because of his race or gender. A century ago, an institution had the right to hire and dismiss anyone on any basis. Employers claimed that they own the companies and hence they had the right to employ someone of their choice (Thomas, 1990). With the emergence of affirmative action which has legal support, companies have the obligation not to deny a qualified person a job opportunity. For instance, in some states, all organizations owned by the government should have gender equality. In Ibarra’s (2001) argument, this has enabled many women to be able to take on professional jobs. Additionally, the numbers of women graduates are also increasing with the realization of equality. This is one of the benefits the affirmative action has brought to society. Additionally, affirmative action tends to create job positions awareness in institutions. In many instances, employers tend to give job positions based on their performance on paper. They also look at the interview scores of person. According to Cokorinos (2003), this kind of employment does not assure the company of future success. Employment should also be done on the willingness of a person to work. Due to this, employers tend to consider gender, race or family ties when recruiting staff. This has consequently seen all the top positions given to white people while the people with colour given the menial jobs which have less pay. Affirmative actions are aimed at ending this trend and promote proportion representation. Also on employment, some employers tend to leave out people with poor education and housing facilities. This is rampant to people with colour as they are unfairly left out of employment processes (Tam & Basser, 2004). In support of affirmative actions, court rulings have termed illegal those qualifications that are not required when doing a particular job. Frankel (1995) indicates that affirmative action aids in extenuating the past events of institutional racism. These actions also gainsay the implications of current day prejudice, by will or not. Not all existing white people have good intents. A huge percentage of them hold the assertion that everyone should have an equal prospect of employment, but they still have intolerance against black people. According to Cohen & James (2003), these prejudices lead to discrimination even though they are well intentioned. With imprecise number of results, it said that a good number of people in institutions and organizations still discriminate people, while still advocating for equal opportunities. There are so many smart and not so smart moves to stamp out black people from the employment application procedures (Ibarra, 2001). It is not shocking that administrators have founded means to prevaricate affirmative action unless it is tied to physical evidence and promotion aims. In a world with such upsetting proof of racism, it assumed that persons and organizations will be in opposition to the efforts to stop it. For example, in the year 1993 the (EEOC), Equal Employment Opportunity Commission had 70,000 discrimination cases pending (Orfield, 2001). It is essential to set objectives and implement and scrutinize standards since it is the only method in which observance can be measured. These are the methods required to make certain that affirmative action is effective and efficient. Another noteworthy benefit of affirmative action is the claimed diversity rationale. Activists for the diversity rationale differ in opinion, that the whole society gains when affirmative action is applied to maintain diverse institutions, schools, and organisations (Guinier & Sturn, 2001). From the claims derived from this argument, individuals from diverse backgrounds, customs, and gender carry complementary abilities, that when brought together they supplement their working and learning places. Affirmative action critics decline to consider the diversity argument completely. They argue that there is no natural social gain to varied institutions or organisations. A significant number accept the argument that the society benefits from diversity but do not completely agree with the assertion that racial and gender traits give a logic basis to built and assess the benefits of diversity in society (Crosby, 2006). Affirmative action critics argue that the procedures only benefit black individuals who are well off or live in the middle class of the society (Sowell, 2004). They argue that affirmative action should be benefiting individual with poor lifestyles and with no employment opportunities who most need it. An insight research has confirmed that affirmative action programs have only impacted on only few members of poor individuals and African Americans with employment opportunities. This begs the question whether the programs impact on the racially abused and need help (Jacobs, 2004). Some individuals are using affirmative basis to manipulate employers to gain top positions in organisations. With the sensitivity of racism, ethnicity and gender based discrimination; employers have been put in tight positions which dictate their employment procedures. With many organisations willing and effecting anti discrimination policies, some people with colour dictate their position to be offered with the threat of legal procedures (Tam & Basser, 2004). In an event of a legal battle, it is an obvious assumption that the employer faces a great risk of losing the battle. This will lead to a possible closure of business due to bad publicity or court action. According to Ibarra (2001) affirmative action provides too much protection on people with colour and women. Another disadvantage is that many white people with a long past of discrimination cases against them face difficulties in acquiring new employment opportunities. According to Thomas (1990) these kinds of people are claimed to be still paying for their racist mistakes. Looking at it on another perspective, this is clearly unfair. For example, a white man was charged for racially abusing a black guy 10 years ago. According to him, the best job he can find is a cleaner’s job. The affirmative action policies have condemned him to his current position. This particular issue needs to be addressed if affirmative action aims at bringing equality. Additionally, to be only concerned about black people not getting jobs and living out white people is also a way of showing racial preference (Cohen & James, 2003). It is a general opinion that affirmative action has impacted positively on the society. Affirmative action has brought equality to society. Additionally, affirmative action has given the society a platform to air their needs and wants. Abandoning of affirmative action would be a cruel thing do since it has brought major changes in society. Without abandoning affirmative action, equality in the society is guaranteed. Affirmative action should be part and parcel of the society today. Conclusion Despite the fact that affirmative action has major impacts on present-day society, it has a long way to go in achieving its definitive equality golden goal (Crosby, 2006). Nonetheless, affirmative action has positively impacted on lives of people who can now get opportunities which were previously not achievable. Black people, women and white persons are some of the main beneficiaries of affirmative action programs. Affirmative action cannot provide solutions to all the challenges in society. For instance, discrimination cases will cause a lot of complications in the pursuit for eradication of discrimination. Competition of scarce resources will also remain stiff. However, the action will make sure that all individuals in society get equal opportunities to achieve their goals (Ibarra, 2001). Even with affirmative action, people still have the questions why there are fewer employment prospects, and the reasons behind educational institutions not having enough seats to accommodate all. Providing black people with these limited resources in an easier way is not only unfair, but it also removes the obstacles that make these resources be scarce (Chang, 2003). This will lead to a definite social injustice which will impact negatively to individuals not benefiting from affirmative action programs. Private owned organizations argue that it is within their power to hire persons from their own selection of preferences (Sowell, 2004). With limited employment positions in government organisations, private organisations hold the key to employment positions. This will lead to automatic favouritism in employment of certain marginalised groups. In an argument by Guinier & Sturn (2001), a proper affirmative action program should be able to provide equality in all centres of the society and equality which is far from being achieved in the modern day society. Even with many critics against affirmative action, Crosby (2006) argues that abandoning it will bring back the dark days of racism. It is clear that affirmative action has impacted positively to the society. Additionally, the society cannot do away with affirmative action, since it is what protects them from any form of inequality from bodies with power over them. References Acton, J., 2000. Positive Discrimination/Affirmative Action. International Debate Education Association website. Available at: http://www.debatabase.org/details.asp?topicID=40. Accessed on May 29, 2005. Chang, J., 2003. Compelling Interest: Examining the Evidence on Racial Dynamics in Colleges and Universities. California: Stanford University Press Cohen, C., & James, S., 2003. Affirmative Action and Racial Preferences: A Debate. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cokorinos, L., 2003. The Assault on Diversity: An Organized Challenge to Racial and Gender Justice. Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield. Crosby, F., 2006. Understanding Affirmative Action. Annual Review of Psychology. Vol 56, pp. 585-611. Frankel, M., 1995. “Reaffirm the Affirmative,” New York Times Magazine, February 26, 1995, p. 22. Garrett, J. 2004. Discrimination and Affirmative Action. Available at: http://www.wku.edu/~jan.garrett/ethics/discaffi.htm. Accessed on May 26, 2005. Guinier, L., & Sturm, S., 2001. Whos Qualified? Boston: Beacon Press. Ibarra, A., 2001. Beyond Affirmative Action: Reframing the Context of Higher Education. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press. Jacobs, A., 2004. Pursuing Equal Opportunities: The Theory and Practice of Egalitarian Justice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Orfield, G., 2001. Diversity Challenged: Evidence on the Impact of Affirmative Action. Massachusetts: Harvard Education Publishing Group. Puddington, A., 1995. “What to Do About Affirmative Action,” Commentary, June, 1995, p. 23. Sander, R. 2004. A Systemic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools. Stanford: Stanford Law Review. Schwartz, J., 2009. The Future Of Democratic Equality: Rebuilding Social Solidarity In A Fragmented America. New York: Taylor & Francis. Sharma, A., 2005. Reservation And Affirmative Action: Models of Social Integration in India And the United States. London: SAGE. Skrentny, J., 2001. Color Lines: Affirmative Action, Immigration, and Civil Rights Options for America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Sowell, T., 2004. Affirmative Action around the World: An Empirical Study. Haven: Yale University Press. Tam, S., & Bassett, G., 2004. Does diversity matter? Measuring high school diversity on freshman GPA. Policy Studies Journal,Vol.32, No. l.  Thomas, R., Jr. 1990. From Affirmative Action to Affirming Diversity. Harvard Business Review, March – April, pp. 107-117. Vidu, S., 1999. Morality vs. mandate: Affirmative action in employment. Public Personnel Management. Winter 1999. Vol. 28 (4), pp. 577-598. Read More