Affirmative Action
Jan. 6th, 2003 08:28 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
vicarzMost people misunderstand, based on insane fear-based media, what that means. In short, Affirmative Action is NOT about QUOTAS, or even preferential treatment.
I enforced Affirmative Action programs for government contractors, some of the most heavily regulated companies in the country, for about 7.5 years in the US Department of Labor's OFCCP. Affirmative Action programs in this country, in terms of employment, do NOT mean preferential hiring. There are some programs that are different on the state level, but very few of those a) I've heard of b) still exist.
Colleges still use affirmative action, but people don't often know on what basis. Race is one factor they use, so is gender, socioeconomic background, class rank, undergraduate gpa, SAT, high school, type of school (priv or public), geographic location...diversity has been going on for ages - but it only seems to piss people off when race is counted. People instantly think I like preferential treatment when they find out my mom got into college on a quota, since my name is José. They figure I'm pro-'reverse'-discrimination. Well, mommie is white! She got in because of her geographic location, and her Merit Scholarship.
Quick breakdown for government contractors:
All personnel decisions must be made on the basis of merit, and documented. Rate of compensation, hires, terminations, promotions, and other actions such as transfers must be recorded and have the ability to demonstrate on what basis the selection decision was made. All personnel decisions must be made without regard to race, color, religion, national origin, veteran status, or disability.
The only part of 'affirmative' that exists is the following:
The workforce must be broken up into job groups i.e. Officials & Managers, professionals, technicians, etc. The groups are set by the company. They are then required to use statistical data to compare their workforce by job group to the workforce for the industry type, group, and geographic location they reside in. If, for a particular job group, they have a lower percentage of minorities or females than similar companies in the area, they are required to make some good faith effort to recruit from minority and female recruitment sources. These good faith efforts are to be made in addition to, rather than instead of, what they already use. That is to day if they like to hire using monster.com, and they are underutilized for minority computer programmers, they would have to use something like Howard University career center in addition to Monster.com. Takes about 5 mins more at the most, and is free. This...is what they are complaining about. Doesn't reek of preferential treatment does it? The vast majority of all 'affirmative action' regulations are merely those that level the playing field, rather than tilt the scale. Won't hear that on WTOP!
Regardless of makeup, all companies are required to actively recruit the disabled and veterans. Most do this simply by informing the state of their job vacancies, again a free service.
I enforced Affirmative Action programs for government contractors, some of the most heavily regulated companies in the country, for about 7.5 years in the US Department of Labor's OFCCP. Affirmative Action programs in this country, in terms of employment, do NOT mean preferential hiring. There are some programs that are different on the state level, but very few of those a) I've heard of b) still exist.
Colleges still use affirmative action, but people don't often know on what basis. Race is one factor they use, so is gender, socioeconomic background, class rank, undergraduate gpa, SAT, high school, type of school (priv or public), geographic location...diversity has been going on for ages - but it only seems to piss people off when race is counted. People instantly think I like preferential treatment when they find out my mom got into college on a quota, since my name is José. They figure I'm pro-'reverse'-discrimination. Well, mommie is white! She got in because of her geographic location, and her Merit Scholarship.
Quick breakdown for government contractors:
All personnel decisions must be made on the basis of merit, and documented. Rate of compensation, hires, terminations, promotions, and other actions such as transfers must be recorded and have the ability to demonstrate on what basis the selection decision was made. All personnel decisions must be made without regard to race, color, religion, national origin, veteran status, or disability.
The only part of 'affirmative' that exists is the following:
The workforce must be broken up into job groups i.e. Officials & Managers, professionals, technicians, etc. The groups are set by the company. They are then required to use statistical data to compare their workforce by job group to the workforce for the industry type, group, and geographic location they reside in. If, for a particular job group, they have a lower percentage of minorities or females than similar companies in the area, they are required to make some good faith effort to recruit from minority and female recruitment sources. These good faith efforts are to be made in addition to, rather than instead of, what they already use. That is to day if they like to hire using monster.com, and they are underutilized for minority computer programmers, they would have to use something like Howard University career center in addition to Monster.com. Takes about 5 mins more at the most, and is free. This...is what they are complaining about. Doesn't reek of preferential treatment does it? The vast majority of all 'affirmative action' regulations are merely those that level the playing field, rather than tilt the scale. Won't hear that on WTOP!
Regardless of makeup, all companies are required to actively recruit the disabled and veterans. Most do this simply by informing the state of their job vacancies, again a free service.
