Extract of sample
There should be no discrimination or biased decisions based on gender, race, or disability of a worker but rather on merit.
As a human resource manager, I have to follow affirmative action to give equal employment opportunities to all workers. For instance, while hiring and there are two people in need of a job, then I call for an interview for these two, one is a white and the other a black. In the end, if the black ends qualifying for the job, I will have to hire him because of his qualifications but not because of his race. Furthermore, when promoting, rewarding, compensating, recruiting, firing, and training I have to consider affirmative action before anything else. When punishing a worker I have to apply the same process applied to others, as the punishment given to a white is the same punishment I will have give to black without considering racial.
The initial intent of affirmative action was to give equal employment chances to both the minority without considering race, religion, gender and ethnicity. For example, the blacks lacked jobs in the United States due to racial discrimination whereby the white looked down upon them as inferior in their country. However, the affirmative action came and gave them equal employment rights. Due to affirmative action, the blacks were able to do jobs, which were performed by the whites in organizations and companies just as well as the whites despite the race. Its intent was also to help the blacks to be considered on equal platform as any other worker at the work place being given same treatment and respect that was given to a white.
The first conclusion in the landmark bakke versus regent’s case was that, the race could be considered unless some other factors such as economic disadvantages were considered as well. For example, in case of a company in US having vacancy for C.E.O, and there are two people qualified for the job but because US is more of white than blacks, the white ...