Business Ethics - Discrimination

There are many supporters and opponents of Affirmative Action. The focus of Affirmative action is meant to be an attempt at equality throughout society. Every sector in America would be equal and unprejudiced. On the other hand, adopting affirmative action would force many employers to replace hard-working employees with those possibly less qualified simply due to their gender or ethnicity. Throughout history, people have been categorized into different groups. These groupings were based on certain characteristics people shared, whether it was their ethnicity, race, gender, or religion. Society is notorious for distinguishing among different groups and favoring one or two of them. Undoubtedly, this separation of peoples, led to increased tension between various groups. As time progressed, the conflicts intensified, and it became apparent that a change was necessary. So I intend to educate the reader on the origin of Affirmative Action; how it impacted the American society; is it still needed in today’s environment; what are some of the drawbacks or issues that came from implementing Affirmative Action, and finally what is the most beneficial aspect from Affirmative Action. One of the most famous quotes about Affirmative Action comes from President Lyndon Johnson who explained the rationale behind the use of affirmative action to achieve equal opportunity in a 1965 speech: “You do not take a person, who for years, has been hobbled by chains and liberate him, bring

During the last part of this century, businesses and organizations have heavily relied on affirmative actions laws to ensure equal employment opportunities. The failure of this dependence upon legislation is that is doesn't address the full spectrum of diversity in the workplace (6). Affirmative actions laws have limitations, discriminating against people holding protected-class status such as women, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans,

Supporters of affirmative action also argue affirmative action helps to diversify jobs and schools. Although the program does bring some minorities into jobs and schools, there is a price to pay for it. Whites are not allowed into those places because they need to "diversify" the schools and workplaces. In order for diversification to happen everyone should be able to be accepted instead of taking in the minorities and

The revered civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr. once said, “I look to a day when people will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” In other words, don’t discriminate people because of their race. This should hold true in all aspects of life. Every American deserves an equal opportunity to succeed, which is why affirmative action is inherently racist. Affirmative action refers to various government policies that aim to increase the proportion of minorities and women in jobs and educational institutions historically dominated by white men. The policies usually require employers and institutions to set goals for hiring or admitting minorities. It is responsible for colleges discriminating against Eastern Asians and whites and for employers hiring workers based off of skin color rather than skills or experience. People can’t change their race (except for former president of the Spokane N.A.A.C.P. chapter, Rachel Dolezal, apparently), yet many colleges and employers favor certain races over others by using quotas, or a fixed number of people of each race.

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.

Employment discrimination is any form of unfair treatment at the workplace practiced by the employer against a section of employees on the basis of their gender identity, sexual orientation, age, mental or physical disability, national origin, religion, gender, or race. Employment discrimination is unlawful according to the employment laws as underlined in the 1964, Civil Rights Act, Title VII (Clarkson, Miller & Cross,). In terms of salaries and payment of workers, it is unlawful to segregate employees or classify in compensation and other employment aspects.

Race discrimination involves treating someone (an applicant or employee) unfavorably because he/she is of a certain race or because of personal characteristics associated with race (such as hair texture, skin color, or certain facial features). Color discrimination involves treating someone unfavorably because of skin color complexion.

Affirmative Action is an outcome of the 1960’s Civil Rights Movement. Its purpose is to provide equal opportunities for members of minority groups and women in education and employment. It is not until 1961 did the term “affirmative action” was first used by President John F. Kennedy. He made it very clear in an Executive Order that directed government have to take “affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin.” Since a lot of cooperation still tends to hire white male, by enforcing affirmative action, the number of minority groups and women in the labor force will increase.Affirmative Action helps to eliminate the imbalance in the society and reform the American system. The US Department of Labor describes affirmative action as the banning of discrimination.

Studies that have been conducted to examine the level of access and employment inequity experienced by minority groups show that with equivocal levels of education and work experience, job applicants who have an English sounding name are requested for an interview up to forty percent more than their competing job applicants who have a Indian, Pakistani, or Chinese sounding name (TIEDI, 2011). Furthermore, the dismissal of the African-Canadian woman discussed earlier is not as surprising when one takes into account that in Toronto, arguably Canada’s most multicultural city; those of African-American descent reported one of the highest amounts of discrimination in relation to those of other visible minorities (TIEDI, 2011). The deduction that can be made then is that there still persists to be a belief that there is a correlation between one’s racial background and their perceived ability to do a job as effectively as that of their Caucasian or other dominant racial counterparts. Such a belief greatly hinders Canada’s workplace as it fails to utilize the skill-sets, knowledge, and qualifications of visible minority individuals that would otherwise benefit the community, and it largely damages one’s ability to integrate into Canadian society as a functioning member treated with equal regard,

Discrimination is the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people or things, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex. Prejudice affects a multitude of minority groups and often makes it more difficult for them to get ahead in life. Discrimination is the most critical issue facing many cultures today because it leads to loss of cultural identity and alienation.

The topic of minorities in the workforce and how the struggle to accomplish equal treatment in today’s workforce is nothing new to our society. For centuries we have been concerned that by bringing together our different backgrounds, skills, and experiences, as well as the many businesses of this great

Affirmative action has been the topic of debate for many years. It has been controversial because it has been said to be a form of reverse discrimination. This paper will discuss the purpose behind affirmative action, as well as, its various strengths and weaknesses. Also, this paper will look at the following issues surrounding affirmative action such as the incompetency myth ( are companies hiring less qualified people?), the impact on employment (what has changed in the work place?), the impact on women (how have their lives changed?) and the impact on employment law (what documents back up affirmative action?). Lastly, a discussion of affirmative action on an international scale, and what international documents have to say about

According to Raymond A. Noe, affirmative action is an organization’s active effort to find opportunities to hire or promote people in a particular group (Fundamentals of Human Resource Management 68). There are various arguments for and against affirmative action. Some believe that it gives certain groups of people an equal opportunity to find employment where they would otherwise be kicked under the rug. Others believe that even though it creates an opportunity for minority groups, the issue of reverse discrimination comes into play where once predominantly white male jobs offerings go to women and minority groups instead. The topic of affirmative action remains very controversial and

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

In a study, when recruiters were asked to choose a suitability applicant for employment in a hypothetical administrative assistant position. They ended up giving less employability rating to applicants with a disability compared to the one without disability. This clearly shows stereotyping in few work places. (Bricout, John C., and Kia J. Bentley.).