Consider the following hypothetical scenarios:
==========================================================
You have worked at your company for several years; you finished your Masters Degree in your spare time at night school. You come up for promotion, you have it in the bag, and you've got experience, education and seniority. You're called into your boss' office and he tells you that you are not getting the promotion you worked so hard to get. It is being given to a minority employee who not only has less experience and seniority, but also doesn't have the educational background in order to keep its government contracts it had to promote a minority.
You are a police officer who has been with your city's police force for eight years. You take your Sergeants examination and score number 5 out of 50 candidates who took the test. You're a shoe in fore one of the five Sergeant positions opening up in your city. You don't get the promotion. In order to maintain federal funding a minority officer who ranked 27th in testing and only has 5 years experience is promoted to Sergeant over you.
You are a white college student working your way through college because your parents earned to much for you to earn a Pell grant but do not have enough to pay for your college so you are going in debt up to your armpits in Student loans. You have finally reach your last year of college and you have one required course to go, you go up to the registration desk to sign up for the course and told you can not register for the course even though there are ten empty slots. When you ask why, you are told those slots are reserved for minority students, who might want to take the course.
==========================================================
By now you realize that these are not hypothetical situations. Similar situations are being played out or have played out across the country in the name of Affirmative Action (AA). AA grew out of the Civil Rights movements of the 1960's in an effort to end racial discrimination in the work place by the federal government. What it was meant to be and what it has become are two different things. Affirmative Action has become nothing more than federally mandated discrimination on the basis of race or sex.
America's official racial categories were created by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in 1977 and laid out in a document named Statistical Directive 15. Hundreds of federal agencies use these classifications when drafting regulations and laws that treat Americans according to their racial makeup. Currently there are five official, government-approved racial classifications: white, black, American Indian/Eskimo, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Hispanic. At this time the OMB over the last three years has been considering adding the classifications: Hawaiian, multiracial, Middle Easterner, Arab American, six different kinds of Latino, "other," Creole, and Germanic.
In 2000 former Libertarian Party Chairman Steve Dasbach stated, "Various ethnic groups are vigorously lobbying to have their category added to the official list of races -- because they know they'll hit the financial jackpot if they become a protected class under anti-discrimination laws. [Emphasis added]"
For example, the Federal Communications Commission awards 25% "bidding credits" to minority-owned companies, so a member of a government-approved minority would pay, for example, $750,000 for a $1 million radio station license." .
In Washington State minority or women owned businesses are given preference over other businesses when contracts are handed out, even if the bid is higher than a non-minority business. Other federal agencies use the racial data to arrange low-interest loans, to enforce quotas for college admissions -- even to decide whom to hire and fire. As you can see, AA is no longer about ending discrimination but about how big of the pie minority special interest groups can get.
In my humble opinion, AA hurts minorities and women more than it helps them. Martin Luther King said in his famous "I Have a Dream" speech, "I have a dream, that one day my four little children will be judged, not by the color of their skin, but on the basis of their character." I think that Mr. King's dream has become a nightmare. Because AA in effect says, if you are a minority or a women you have no chance of getting a job, promotion, going to college, or owning your own business because of the color of your skin or your sex.
Some of you who are reading this are now thinking, "I've got you pegged now Joseph V., you're some angry white male." And you would be right, up to a point. You would be right that I am a white male, and I am angry. But, what I am angry about is the fact that women and minorities are getting short changed, they have no way of knowing if they got a job on the basis of merit or because of their skin color or sex.
Interesting dilemma, in an effort to stamp out discrimination, the federal government has enacted a system similar to South Africa's during Apartheid. And, just like South Africa during Apartheid Americans can be rejected for a home loan, lose the chance to attend the college of their choice, or even get fired from their job, depending on their racial classification.
I know of one case where a man was unjustly fired from his job. He called the Employment Security Office to see what his recourse was. He was told there was nothing they could do because he was not a member of a [officially sanctioned] minority race.
The federal government publishes recommendations of what it feels is a "proper" racial mix in private enterprise. These "recommendations" become de facto quotas and woe to any business that doesn't meet those "recommendations".
Several years ago in Illinois, the white owner of a small lamp manufacturing company denied a black woman employment because she didn't have the qualifications required for the job. She in turn filed suite against the owner saying she was not hired on the basis of her race with the State Employment Office. The state forced the owner to pay the woman for work she never does.
Was the owner guilty of racial discrimination? The answer is no. You see the state of Illinois never bother to investigate the business, if they had they would have found out that 75% of the employees were minorities. During an interview with CBS 60 Minutes, the head of the Illinois State Employment Office stated that he felt that the woman was discriminated against on the basis of race, even though there was ample evidence to the contrary.
In the end, and several thousand taxpayers dollars and business owners dollars latter the Illinois State Supreme Court ruled in favor of the business owner on the basis that there was no evidence that suggested the woman was not hired on the basis of race. But there was an additional cost, it was in the form of employees that were laid off because the cost of the court cases was eating into the business, contracts that were lost because the business was not able to keep up with demand losing even more money. All because of enforcement of a "recommended racial mix" in the work place that wasn't even adequately investigate.
In the end we as a American citizens are going to have to decide whether or not we are going to continue to let the government continue is policy of sanctioned discrimination or unite as one nation, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 9
: )
There is however some things that are considered. Lets say the population in a fifty mile radius of the company site is 50% minority, but only 10% of the workforce actually employed is a minority. In a case like that, Lucy may have some 'splaining to do...
When a company is out of kilter like that so to say, a company should have a plan (targets/goals) to try and balance the workforce to keep gov't contracts or avoid fines, not to mention lawsuits; so if all things are equal hire the minority. The same goes with rates of pay etc.
I was always expected to hire the most qualified person, but keep an eye on the company's targets/goals for equal opportunity employment.
I wouldn't be surprised however, that a company that doesn't keep an eye on it's individual Manager's hiring practices and as years pass it finds itself in trouble with the government, that it would go to some drastic quick measures to correct their failures; as in your examples above.
I'm not arguing one way or the other by the way, just trying to shead some light on experiences. Take care.
Local 46 of the IBEW was under a court order to only hire "blacks" in the apprentice program to become an electrician. Instead of a 4 year apprenticeship it was cut to 2. They were to be given the answers to the Journeyman's exam and "Failure to pass the journeyman's exam does not prevent them from having journeyman's status" I was the chairman of the Examining board back then. They got journeyman status but only in the jurisdiction of local 46. Outside of our jurisdiction they were not even electricians. I used to take some of them aside when they failed and explain the facts to them that they could only work out of local 46. Next time they came in they passed with flying colors and became recognized Journeyman Electricians. They are the ones that worked hard and learned in two years to take advantage of the judges decision.
Even then they had a hard time filling slots because a lot of them came in and got a job. Showed up one day and left. The company they went to work for kept them on the payroll untill the job was done although they never entered the job site just to keep their contracts manditory "balance".
"In the end we as a American citizens are going to have to decide whether or not we are going to continue to let the government continue is policy of sanctioned discrimination or unite as one nation, indivisible with liberty and justice for all."
That is the overwhelming question which we as American citizens must decide. Do we allow the government to dictate how fairness should be implemented or do we simply treat everyone in a fair and equitable way by boldly pointing out the many obvious discriminatory practices we see? So far we do not. Looking at your initial examples I hope you can understand how I and I am sure millions of others feel after years of preparation and experience only to be denied or skipped over for promotions and raises. Yes, it exists, still today, not only in federal and local governments but all sorts of industries, and even not for profits.
What I always look for when I read an article like this is if the writer is going to explain the normal unofficial Affirmative Action which has always been in existence and thrives fully today. For those of you who have no idea of what I speak I mean the overwhelming cases where someone is hired with little or no experience above someone like me who has decades of experience. To make matters even more obnoxious I am assigned to train this person and he ends up being my boss. The difference in our situation is only that I am black. Experience or seniority has little to do with the outcome. I worked under a carpentry union banner for a number of years until I finally told them to go to hell. I got tired of them taking my dues money yet constantly forgetting me on the jobs list. I would drive by and notice a new project with a bunch of neophytes working yet here I and hundreds of others like me are not working. Experience and seniority meant nothing at all. And to add injury to insult when I and others formed our own small companies we find our biggest competitors are wives, girlfriends and daughters of some of the larger company owners who are being awarded contracts under a so called minority preference program. They own the minority companies headedby their female presidents. The handful of contracts awarded to most "real" minority companies overall is negligible at best at least in the St Louis area. The entire construction field is flooded with disgusting unfair exercise of labor practices. I have seen cases in the IBEW where minorities graduated with honors from one of the best trade institutions in the area yet were started with lower pay and a slower track on advancement.
Last fall I was on a rehab project across the alley from three new homes being built with affiliation with a major school with some students performing the work with a couple journeyman as oversight. I was so proud to see a black man in charge until I learned that he was the one with the electrical engineering degree but was actually third in line on the job. One of the other two was not even a journeyman as yet but was his supervisor. Like I said I know the feelings you expressed in your opening paragraph.
What is needed is a lot more honesty in our hiring practices, contract awarding and entrance procedures in institutions of higher learning. When one raises an issue like you have I ask that you look at the whole picture which affects all of us in a negative way. Many companies do seek the most qualified person for their positions but a whole lot of them could care less. As a small company operator I have to have the best person in each job slot I can find regardless of race. I can not afford the mediocrity in which I find in so many instances. Perhaps that is one of the reasons we have so many shoddy products and lousy customer service in those companies who still have their customer service department in the US. Maybe the customer service manager got his promotion over a qualified person who just might have been black.
What I see in the Illinois case you mentioned is the over zealousness of a mediocre enforcer of the rules. If you check the number of cases filed for discrimenation and those which actually reach the courts the vast majority of them never reach the light of day and are controlled by whatever government entity which is in charge of that situation. And yes, the US government is not only one of the largest purveyors of discriminatory practices but also controls the number and selective cases which are allowed to reach the courts. Supreme court justice Clarence Thomas was more than likely awarded his position because he succeeded in holding back one of the largest number of discrimination cases in history of the EEOC. Even those which had been investigated and found to be sound in nature. How ironic, a black man keeping the door shut to fair and equitable hiring practices. It takes all kinds but I can never figure why.
I ask this rhetorical question. How do we make these issues fair for all citizens?
Good thought provoking article. Happy Thanksgiving.
I disagree totally with the statement that in affect AA is saying that if I am a minority or a woman I have no chance of getting a job, promotion, going to college or owning my own business because of the color of my skin or my sex. I must give props to the PR firm Ward Connerly used in California when he was leading the fight against AA. They created that line and now I see it used constantly by those fighting against AA. In reality what AA means is not that we have no chance but that there is a large probability that we will be dishonorably treated because of the color of our skin and/or sex. That is closer to the reality of the issue. When Connerly and his anti AA group were asked what, if anything, they suggest to take its place their answer was so poignantly disgusting. "We already have in place the laws and the courts to ajudicate those who honestly face discrimnation." How disingenious can one be especially when he is so familiar with the serious difficulty in not only getting a case filed but to actually get it in court. I suppose those who are so ademently against AA feel as long as they are not the ones treated unfairly all will be well. Let me see. That sounds like a case for a Hmmmm to me.
Now, understand something up front, I agree with the INTENT behind the formation AA laws in the first place, however, I don't agree with the AA laws themselves. They are too easily abused by overzealous bureaucrats and/or by unscrupulous members of the minority communities with a chip on their shoulder.
I saw mention about AA cases going to court, now I don't know about other states other than Washington State and what I have read up on with the state of Illinois. All AA complaints in Washington start first with a complaint to the Washington state Department of Labor and Industries or LNI for short. Then and only if the LNI investigate and determines that there was discrimination, then the petitioner can then file suit against a company. From what I understand, most of the rest of the states have a similar process.
Unfortunately, many of these cases are inadequately investigated, and that is where the problem begins. As was pointed out, many of these cases are thrown out, but there is still a cost involved. Products and Services go up in cost because businesses have had to spend a great deal of money to defend themselves in court and those costs are in turn passed on to the consumer.
I tend to take a slightly more pragmatic approach, get rid of the AA laws, lets be honest they don't work. Instead, let people discriminate and suffer the consequences of and loss of business to those businesses, which do not discriminate. Governmentally forced association is only generating resentment and division. Market Forces, while slower, are more effective and don't create the same type of resentment of AA Laws.
The first type of AA at a voluntary level, which is the best way for it to work, IMNSHO, was when Dr. King started Operation Breadbasket. What Dr. King did was convince a number of business owners & corporations, primarily in the south, but also in the north (primarily in Detroit, IL and New York, NY) to voluntarily hire minorities and the poor, regardless of race. The program worked, the reason why it worked was the fact that it was voluntary; business didn't have the metaphorical governmental gun being to their heads. Now, I am not saying that these businesses participated just because it was the right thing to do, but because it was in their self-interest to do so. No company, back then and especially today, can afford bad PR. By participating in Operation Breadbasket, these businesses were making themselves look good, which in turn would increase the number of consumers using their products/services, especially those in the Civil Rights movement.
From my experience, it does not matter HOW I got there because I could not STAY there without being smarter, more organized and harder working than my white peers-PERIOD. Affirmative action gave me the opportunity to enter an arena that was closed to my family. I recall in MBA school a paragraph in my finance textbook that explained that "if my great, great grandfather had the wisdom to invest $1.00 in the stock market that I would be a millionaire today". I recall my classmates and professor all marvelling at how profound that concept of compound interest would have been realized. Ha! My grandfather struggled to maintain debt free his own acreage without being harassed by the bigots in his hometown! How the heck could his grandfather invested in Wall Street? My own mother was told by one of her childhood friends when she announced she was planning to attend college that it was ridiculous because SHE was a white woman and couldn't afford to college. Who did she think SHE was and who ever heard of a darkie going to college anyway? Had it not been for affirmative action, these stinging incidents could have painted a picture that certain people should not strive for the better things in life because it was not meant for them to have. Affirmative action may have made certain people uncomfortable that I was sitting next to them competing for the same so-called limited resources...but I could not have STAYED, GRADUATED and /or BEEN PROMOTED if my sales #s, academic grades or anonymous employee feedback had not been stellar and superior to my peers. So I am a strong proponent that the more level the playing field, the faster the athletes can perform.
In my mind, it is making the situation worse, not only that, but at the government level it is putting people who lack the experience and knowledge into positions they really shouldn't have. The second senerio that I wrote, actually happened in Seattle WA, and there have been similar senerios played out in Los Angelos CA, New York NY, and other major metropolitan areas across the country. The whole point behind the merit testing was to eliminate race as a factor for promotion, but AA laws circumvent merit, and make race a factor in promotions.