Affirmative Action On Equal Rights

Proponents of affirmative action believe that it is a necessary step toward racial equality. Opponents argue on the basis of “reverse racism,” which claims that affirmative action keeps certain members of the majority ethnic group out of jobs or other positions that they deserve solely because of quotas that must be filled. The positive effects of affirmative action are the basis behind the arguments of those who support considering ethnicity and race as a part of admissions.

In Professor William Shaw’s The Organization and the People In It, Shaw delves into the debate that is affirmative action. According to Shaw, “affirmative action means programs taking the race or sex of employees or job candidates into account as part of an effort to correct imbalances in employment that exist as a result of past discrimination, either in the company itself or in the larger society”(Shaw, p. 437). Affirmative action promotes the diversity of job opportunities for both genders and all races. Some of the opportunities can cause an unfair advantage to minorities when paired against equal or sometimes better-qualified white counterparts. This can become a moral issue by causing unfair advantages to some people. By attempting to level the playing field, affirmative action actually over compensates for potential discrimination and can place white males at a disadvantage. Affirmative action attempts to balance the application system for college or postgraduate work, however at the expense of some qualified students.

Affirmative Action is an employment legislation protection system that is intended to address the systemized discrimination faced by women and minorities. It achieves this by enforcing diversity through operational intrusions into recruitment, selection, and other personnel functions and practices in America. Originally, Affirmative Action arose because of President Lyndon B. Johnson’s desire to integrate society on educational, employment, and economic levels, yet it was John F. Kennedy who issued Executive Order 10925 to create the Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, a commission that evolved into our modern Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Before, going into this we need to look at the past discriminative policies adopted many companies, responsible for many acts of discrimination against minorities. Menial and low level jobs were offered to certain ethnic and minority groups. Even, woman was denied certain job categories on the ground of strength and their capabilities. This discriminatory policy adopted for so many decade has led to a situation where there cannot be a level playing field without taking certain affirmative action.

As affirmative action has become a simplistic strategy to decrease racial bigotry, it has developed into undermining the minority while producing favoritism. Additionally, the flawed policy has created preference within career fields and an academic mismatch among races. To eliminate this outdated system, financial-based affirmative action would serve as a revolutionary law that would help those suffering in poverty without highlighting the color of an individual 's skin.

The questionable existence of affirmative action continues to create a pervasive tug of war between proponents and opponents of affirmative action. The cornerstone of affirmative action policies initiated from the U.S. Supreme Court case of Brown v. Board of Education, in which the Supreme Court ruled that segregation was unequal—ultimately forever changing the system of education in America. This groundbreaking decision served as a gateway, with the goal of “leveling the playing field” and remedying the grotesque American past rooted in harsh racial discrimination against non-white individuals, primarily of African American descent. As a result of swift implementation of affirmative action policies, cultural and racial diversity quickly diversified

Affirmative action from the 1960s has generated a more diverse society and it focused mainly on opportunities for middle-class African-Americans pursuing an approach to exceptional jobs and higher education. “Affirmative action has done more to advance fair treatment across racial lines than any other recent public policy. If affirmative action did not exist, the United States would be a vastly more segregated country. Without such efforts, most white Americans would have far less contact with their fellow black citizens.” (171) In other words, without affirmative action, diversity could no longer survive. Black Americans would be stigmatized and condemned as a subordinate group even more so. In the 1978 Supreme Court case of the Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, Justice Lewis Powell offered firm standards for racial modification. He argued that adjustments to color-blind strategies could be commenced to remedy race-based detriments when two circumstances are met. There has to be a pure connection to affirmative action’s remedies and past harms based on race. Also, the tie between past actions and present policy must be sturdy and accurate. Powell also believed if there is a non-racial way to chase a specified goal, that way should always be the preferred route. Affirmative action is legitimized because the detriment of blacks in the Roosevelt and Truman years satisfies Powell's “strict-scrutiny” test. “Combining Powell’s principles and Johnson’s ambitions . . . push us forward to a framework for public policies that can respond to the injuries inflicted by officially sanctioned

Discrimination and segregation have been inbred into America’s history from day one. Therefore, there have been many laws and bills passed to break down barriers between privileged whites and unfortunate minorities. Among these government actions are the 14th Amendment, Equal Pay Act, and the Civil Rights Acts. John F. Kennedy perhaps created one of the most heavily debated policies today, his Affirmative Action Policy. Affirmative action is defined as, “the practice of improving the educational and job opportunities of members of groups that have not been treated fairly in the past because of their race, sex, etc.” (“Definition of AFFIRMATIVE” 1). The definition itself is vague and open for a good deal of interpretation which causes much of today’s debates. The most recent interpretation of Affirmative Action came from the Fisher vs. University of Texas at Austin (UT of Austin). Fisher was a white individual who was denied acceptance into the university, and then filed a lawsuit against them. Fisher lost the case at the Supreme Court level in 2013, but the case returned in 2016 again with a much closer vote, so affirmative action is losing some of its power and will continue to be challenged for years to come, but is it worth the challenge (Kut.org 1)? Affirmative Action has served a vital role in the integration of race into universities and the workforce, but now it is outdated and an unnecessary requirement for schools and businesses.

I think affirmative action was fair at its inception under Lynden B. Johnson, and throughout the remainder of the 20th century, but I don’t feel it’s fair in society today.

A way to achieve fair employment for all people happened in 1961 when President John Kennedy, used the phrase “Affirmative Action” in the United States in which it attributed to Executive Order 10925”. (Sterba, 2009, p.15) The reality was that businesses needed a way to hold accountability for employee’s applicants to be treated fairly in promotional decisions and the hiring process. Employment discrimination and segregation was legal in the United States before 1964. White workers and black workers during that time almost never worked together in the same jobs. Minorities were grouped in lower paying and less status jobs. During that era, white males

A way to achieve fair employment for all people happened when in 1961 then President John Kennedy, used the phrase “affirmative action” in the United States in which it attributed to Executive Oder 10925”. (Sterba, 2009, p.15) The reality was that businesses needed a way to hold accountability for employee’s r applicants to be treated fairly in promotion decisions and the hiring process. Employment discrimination and segregation was legal in the United States before 1964. White workers and black workers during that time almost never worked together in the same jobs, minorities were grouped in lower paying and less status jobs. During that era, white males held the professional jobs, managerial positions, and the highly

When addressing legal issues of diversity in the modern day era, one main topic is brought to discussion, affirmative action. It was put into place by the federal government in the 1960’s and was initially developed to close the gap in relation to the privileged majority and the unprivileged minority in America (Aguirre Jr. & Martinez, 2003). While it has been controversial since its origin, it remains controversial as critics argue it tries to equalize the impact of so many

“No, it’s not me, it’s you… What’s wrong with you? Why, nothing. You have everything we are looking for, it’s just…you’re black…” First established in 1961, Affirmative action (in the United States) was/is a practice in which the purpose is to improve the employment or educational opportunities of members of minority groups and women (Merriam Webster). Fast forward to today’s society and what is affirmative action now? Considering the prevalence of diversity in the workplace and in educational facilities, it should be of utmost importance that all people, regardless of race, are given the equal opportunity in the admissions and job application process; affirmative action would enforce that importance. However, many job applicants go to an

Many critics of affirmative action believe it has failed to achieve its stated goal of equal employment opportunity. A few even believe that it has done more harm than good. A review of the statistics, however, shows

A major controversy encompassing the country is the issue of affirmative action. Many believe that the abolition, or at least restructure, of affirmative action in the United States will benefit the nation for many logical reasons. Originally, affirmative action began as an attempt to eliminate discrimination and provide a source of opportunity; affirmative action did not begin as an attempt to support just minorities and women. In addition, affirmative action naturally creates resentment when the less qualified are preferred instead of the people actually deserve the admission or job. Another reason that has existed since the abolition of slavery is the myth that women and ?minorities? cannot compete