Affirmative Action Plan

Affirmative action in college admissions continues to be heatedly debated. In 2003, the Supreme Court had ruled in Grutter v. Bollinger that diversity was a compelling interest for colleges to use race in admissions. In the amicus brief that the American Sociological Association et al. provided to the Supreme Court, sociological evidence was presented to elucidate the value of affirmative action. Yet in 2006, Proposal 2 was passed in Michigan to ban affirmative action in public education (Levitsky). Based on the information in the amicus brief, the correlation between race and socioeconomic status of the minorities, and the negative effects of banning affirmative action, admissions officers at the University of Michigan should consider

Generations of families have suffered due unequal laws or prejudices set in place to prevent minorities from growing. Slavery, segregation, separate but equal laws, the trail of tears, failing ESOL classes, unequal pay and so much more effect today's youth and causing history to change slowly if at all. Affirmative action has good intentions and is very much needed in today's world however it sometimes fails doing what it was created to do.

Thesis: Affirmative Action has helped many women and minorities in entering the job market. Although there has been a lot of hue and cry regarding the benefits of the affirmative action and the suitability of candidates selected thorough affirmative action; research has shown that affirmative action is beneficial and the candidates of affirmative action perform as well as those who are selected through the normal process.

Affirmative action has been around for decades. Some believe it isn’t fair but others do. Those who believe and agree with affirmative action tend to say, “The principle of affirmative action is to promote societal equality through the preferential treatment of socioeconomically disadvantaged people” (Bidmead, Andrew pg 3). Others that disagree with it and find it unfair simply see it as another form of discrimination, giving one group extra advantages based upon nothing but their skin color (Cline, Austin pg 1). I believe that affirmative action is indeed fair because it gives minorities a better chance at having a successful career in their near future.

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

California's decision in 1996 to outlaw the use of race in public college admissions was widely viewed as the beginning of the end for affirmative action at public universities all over the United States. But in the four years since Californians passed Proposition 209, most states have agreed that killing affirmative action outright would deepen social inequality by denying minority citizens access to higher education. The half-dozen states that are actually thinking about abandoning race-sensitive

Some people would say that the policy of affirmative action in the workplace only creates positives like diversity and equality in jobs. But this is not the case. Affirmative action may create diversity, but the equality aspect of it is a little shadier. If one job applicant is highly qualified, but does not meet the requirements of affirmative action regulations, such as a white male, they might be passed up for a less qualified applicant, merely because they fit the affirmative action bill by being a minority or other historically underrepresented category of person. This program goes as far as to set quotas for how many minorities, disabled, women, etc. employers have to hire. Along with this, employers must also write and execute an affirmative action plan in order to comply with federal regulations. (Scott) All of these things are intended to create an environment of equality, but they are now actually doing the opposite by excluding qualified whites. Therefore, affirmative action is no longer a sufficient policy to create a diverse and equal workplace.

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.

The article illustrates that the affirmative action policy favors minority members, females and economically disadvantaged people. The focus of the affirmative action policy is to remove discrimination and achieve diversity. The central aspect of research revolves around people that have been discriminated. The policy helps individuals that are qualified candidates for positions of one group over the other.

Diversity in the United States has been stymied due to the country’s legacy of slavery and subsequent successful efforts to legislate segregation of Blacks and Whites. At the beginning of the twentieth century, White legislative leaders sought laws to reflect the citizenry’s preference to discriminate, subordinate, and disenfranchise Black citizens. Segregation ordinances, poll taxes, and discriminatory practices of employers, educational institutions, and skill trade unions formed effective barriers to diversity proponents. This practice of exclusion reigned supreme. Fortunately, the nation has become more accepting of diversity in all phases of political and social life as the population grows increasingly more diverse.

Affirmative action has been one of the most effective tools to correct a history of inequalities in our nation’s history against people of color and women. The huge advances made during Civil Rights era still has not completely eradicated centuries of sexism and racism. Opportunities for advancement for those previously omitted remain few and far between in comparison to their counterparts. Race and gender are not, nor should they be, the only selection measure but they do warrant to be one of the many influences considered in college admissions, hiring, and awarding of grants and other forms of financial aid. Many prestigious and well regarded school universities such as Harvard and Stanford have been at the forefront of this ideal. Nonetheless, affirmative action remains a heavily contested social issue in the United States.

Affirmative Action has been around for many decades from around the 1940s. Although it has not always been called affirmative action, the official title was not introduced until the 1960s. Back then affirmative action was more known as segregation or discrimination in the workplace or there lack of. The women and people of color were the targets of discrimination, which several presidents tried to correct for equality.

Affirmative action is a plan to promote the efforts of employers, schools and other organizations to recruit and hire groups that have previously been discriminated against. It is important to note that affirmative action programs do not require employers to hire unqualified people for a job. Equal employment opportunity is used to describe policies that prohibit discrimination of any kind. Affirmative action is a program that analyses the make up of the current workforce, establishes guidelines to insure an employer is not underutilizing certain groups and identifies and removes barriers for employment. Equal employment is the legislation that provides the oversight and investigates any allegations of

Some experts have formed the opinion that affirmative action plans are no longer needed. Others have reached the opposite conclusion. Affirmative action is an action or policy favoring those who tend to suffer from discrimination, in relation to employment or education. Affirmative action plans are designed to facilitate workplace success for members of the groups they target (women, ethnic minorities), yet ma have ironic effect of stigmatizing AAP targets and, in turn decreasing their performance outcomes (Leslie, Mayer, & Kravitz, 2014). I lean towards those who still feel affirmative action is still needed. Affirmative action is needed because the policy balances the obstacles that minorities and women face in pursuing education and employment

Opposite: Affirmative action prevents racism in the workplace. Affirmative action prevents this from happening, especially in the workplace. Affirmative action protects the rights of minorities and prevents discriminatory actions in the workplace as well as in schools. As Sterba (2011) wrote in his article, “Remedial affirmative action, of course, purports to correct for past racial discrimination. By contrast, diversity affirmative action in the US purports to educate, particularly white students, about racial discrimination by bringing a critical mass of minority students to elite institutions of higher education, and by using educational programs involving both groups of students, to help motivate, particularly white students, to take action