Affirmative Action - Essay Example

? 17 March Affirmative Action Affirmative action is a policy in the United s which emphasizes upon the need for provision of equal opportunities of employment which the law requires the federal subcontractors and contractors to adopt. The affirmative action is implemented with an intention to eradicate discrimination on the basis of such factors as origin, race, ethnicity, sex and color against the candidates applying for a position. The United States Department of Labor has implemented the affirmative action in a number of ways that include but are not limited to targeted recruitment, employee support programs, outreach campaigns, and management development. The American society has conventionally suffered a lot from racism and discrimination. There is a strong need to make such public organizations as the health care organizations, universities and the police increasingly representative of the needs of the respective populations that they cater for. Affirmative action has conventionally been subjected to a lot of debate and controversy. Policies implemented in the name of affirmative action including the gender quotas and the racial quotas for admission in the colleges in the USA have been identified as measures to promote reverse discrimination. Accordingly, the majority in the American constitution has rendered the implementation of these actions as unconstitutional. This paper supports the affirmative action because it is a way of increasing diversity in the American society at all levels, eradication of disparity in the earnings of people based on gender, and enhancement of the literacy rate of minorities in the USA. There is dire need of the affirmative action in the American society for the creation of diversity. Affirmative action serves as an incentive for the people belonging to different social and cultural backgrounds and races to interact with one another in the educational institutions and in the workplaces. Affirmative action is “A policy intended to make Harvard more inclusive has rendered it more exclusive in political and intellectual diversity, the diversity that matters most” (Mansfield). The president of Harvard University, Neil Rudenstine used John Stuart Mill in 1996 to explain the commitment of the Harvard University to diversity. John Stuart Mill asserted that the University intends to create diversity by providing people with frequent opportunities of interaction with people who differ from them. Diversity of students in terms of race, ethnicity, religion and culture is conducive for the development of a healthy educational environment in the schools and universities as it allows students to remove their differences and enhance their understanding of one another’s culture. This is particularly beneficial for the studies of sociology and psychology as students get to look at things from a wider perspective. Patricia Gurin who is the professor of psychology at the University of Miuchigan says that students in a diverse educational setting gain better learning and their tendency to play an active part in the democratic and pluralistic society after the end of their studies is enhanced. Therefore, affirmative action is the need of universities in America. Critics see diversity as a cause of dysfunctional conflicts among the organizational personnel. However, this is a very pessimistic and extremely biased assessment of the impacts of diversity upon the organizational culture. Although there is some possibility of arise of dysfunctional conflicts among the organizational personnel because of their cultural differences, yet this problem can be tackled with effective management and the conflict-resolution practices in place in the organization. Affirmative action is the need of the society because of the widespread lack of equality in the socioeconomic status of people in the USA. There are a lot of places where some people earn more than others simply because the former belong to the majority while the latter form part of the minority. The National Committee on Pay Equity found that women, on average, earn 29 cents lesser than a man’s dollar. If they are not provided with the support of the affirmative action, the groups of minorities in terms of race and gender will continue to face disparities at the workplace. Affirmative action provides both gender- and race-neutral assurance to spread the message of equality in the society and eradicate racism from it. Figure 1 shows the comparison between the median weekly earnings of men and women by sex, race or ethnicity. From the Figure 1, it can be seen that women earn significantly lesser than men in the USA irrespective of their race. Although there is disparity between the difference of median weekly earnings between men and women across races, with the difference being the maximal among the white Americans and minimal among the African Americans, yet one factor that all races share is lesser median weekly earnings of women as compared to men. Critics attribute the lower earnings of women than men to the household responsibilities of the women. They say that women earn lesser because they work lesser. However, there has been a steady increase in the dual earning couples in the USA over the decades, which essentially means that women in the contemporary American society are taking more burden than they did in the past, as they have to divide time between work and home. So even if they work lesser, they deserve to be rewarded more in terms of money. Figure 1: Comparison of the median weekly earnings of men and women Affirmative action is a solution to the differences in the literacy rates of people in the USA grounded in race. There has been disparity in the USA in the likelihood of students belonging to different races but with equal intellectual abilities and competencies to be granted admission in the educational institutions. “there are universities in California that could fill their entire freshman classes with nothing but Asian-Americans” (Clinton cited in Barber). Despite a two-fold increase in the non-metro Hispanic population in the USA since 1980 (Kandel and Cromartie), the Hispanic high school graduates who attend college is 35.2 per cent compared to 41.1 per cent of the African American and 47.3 per cent of the White American high school graduates (Marklein). As a result of the implementation of the affirmative action, the government has obliged educational institutions to reserve certain seats for the students belonging to a particular race. As a result of this, the chances of their admission in the best colleges have enlarged. However, a lot of controversies have been associated with this practice. It is often said that affirmative action has not succeeded in achieving its intended purpose. The theory behind the implementation of the affirmative action was to eradicate racial as well as any kind of discrimination from the society. There have been few cases in which white students have lost the competition to the black students as a result of the extra points gained by the black students due to the imposition of the affirmative action. When this happens, it creates a reverse discrimination as it saps the likelihood of the white students to be treated equally like black students. “Some would argue that the president himself benefited from a form of affirmative action because as a C student, he only got into Yale because his father was a wealthy alumnus. But the White House counters that Saddam is a menace and must be stopped” (Stewart cited in Kurtzman). Reverse discrimination is a rather very subjective concept in numerous ways. First of all, the special consideration to women and minorities which is encouraged by the affirmative action is not equal. There are certain schools and organizations that assign a minimal weight to the race or sex of the candidates while other schools and organizations give these factors more weight. So it cannot be said that affirmative action has subdued the rights of candidates because of the race or sex of some candidates are given more importance everywhere throughout the USA. Secondly, a potential way to judge the extent to which affirmative action can be accepted despite the existence of the reverse discrimination caused by it is by comparing the extent to which the minorities have suffered in the history of America to the majorities that occasionally happen to suffer because of the affirmative action. There is a whole range of research papers in the literature that document the intensity of suffering experienced by the minorities in the history of America while the cases of reverse discrimination are very rare and occasional. “Blacks have more reason to discriminate against whites than do whites against blacks, when you consider that it has been well documented that in recent history, blacks have suffered more injustices at the hands of whites than can be said of the reverse” (“Arguments for and”). Population of people who are suffering from reverse discrimination is far lesser as compared to the population of people that have been the victims of the real discrimination and the two populations are entirely different (Sher). There is never a perfect solution to any problem. Solutions are always optimal. When certain measures are taken to eradicate a certain evil from the society, some consequences are bound to take place that may not be pleasing for certain members of the society. However, the imperfection of a solution does not render it incorrect. The USA has a long history of slavery, racial discrimination and subjugation of the rights of the women. Conventionally, as women have risen to power, it has enlightened the American society at large despite the fact that it has occurred on the cost of rights of some men as well. However, the benefits of women’s empowerment outweigh the losses made. Similarly, the people of color have traditionally been exposed to a lot of challenges in the American society. They have had limited access to opportunities as compared to the white population. Affirmative action is one of the measures the government of the USA has taken to enhance the chances of the minorities to be represented at all levels in the society. Although the existence of reverse discrimination cannot be altogether denied, yet this needs to be understood as an unfavorable consequence of the affirmative action. Still, like the women’s empowerment in the USA, the benefits of the affirmative action far outweigh the losses that have surfaced in the form of reverse discrimination. Overall, affirmative action has done a lot of good to the minorities in the American society. The true definition of the affirmative action is the creation of a gender-neutral and race-neutral assurance for the eradication of actual discrimination in the society. Affirmative action provides the people with a way to create and appreciate diversity and equality at all levels everywhere in the country. It is a potential way to reduce the oppression upon the minorities in race and gender. Therefore, it must be supported. Works Cited: “Arguments for and against reverse discrimination.” 6 Nov. 2009. Web. 17 Mar. 2012. . Barber, La Shawn. “Hispanics vs. Blacks: The Battle For “Preferred Minority” Status.” 8 Feb. 2007. Web. 17 Mar. 2012. . Kandel, William, and Cromartie, John. “New Patterns of Hispanic Settlement in Rural America.” United States Department of Agriculture. May 2004. Web. 17 Mar. 2012. . Kurtzman, Daniel. “Jon Stewart Quotes.” 2012. Web. 17 Mar. 2012. . Mansfield, Harvey C. “The Cost of Affirmative Action.” The Harvard Crimson. 4 June 2008. Web. 17 Mar. 2012. . Marklein, Mary Beth. “Minority enrollment in college still lagging.” USA Today. 30 Oct. 2006. Web. 17 Mar. 2012. . Sher, George. “Reverse discrimination, the future, and the past.” Ethics. Vol. 90. pp. 81- 87. 1979. Read More