Part 1
As the human resources manager, you are now ready to complete your diversity training manual to be used for training and sensitizing your employees on diversity issues. This final section will cover actual legislation. You would like your employees to not only be aware of issues dealing with discrimination that may not be addressed in legislation (the moral component) but to be knowledgeable of the seriousness of the discriminatory practices that have been made into law.
Affirmative Action is one of the most contentious issues; its intent and the discriminatory result of applying it in practice has become a major issue in today's workforce.
Using this Web site (or any others you find), write a paper of 4-6 pages that will summarize the following points and become part of the training manual:
What is Affirmative Action?
What was the initial intent of Affirmative-Action legislation?
What did the landmark Bakke v. Regents case conclude?
What was the basis for the conclusion?
What are the positive and negative results of Affirmative Action legislation?
In your evaluation, is Affirmative Action legislation is still appropriate?
References
Ball, H. (2000). The Bakke case. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas. Retrieved from https://lilt.ilstu.edu/gmklass/pos334/archive/ball.htm
Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e (1964). Retrieved from https://finduslaw.com/civil-rights-act-1964-cra-title-vii-equal-employment-opportunities-42-us-code-chapter-21
University of California Regents v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978). Retrieved from the FindLaw Web site:https://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=438&invol=265
Submitting your assignment in APA format means, at a minimum, you will need the following:
Diversity Training Manual Part 1
Abstract
For completing diversity training manual; like the HR manager, this paper would cover definition of the Affirmative Action, describe what initial intent about Affirmative Action legislation had been. This would in addition talk of landmark Bakke vs. Regents case summarized, provide positive as well as negative outcomes of the Affirmative Action legislation, and also tell when Affirmative Action legislation has still been proper in such scenario.
Introduction
Some form of affirmative action had existed in the late 1800s but the extension and enforcement of it really started in the late 1900s. Effectively, the term "affirmative action" was first employed by President Lyndon Johnson in1965 in the Executive Order 11246. The order was applied to the federal government employees to make sure they were employed, treated without regard to their race, belief, color, and nationality. That order was expanded to protect women from discrimination in 1967 by Lyndon Johnson (What is Affirmative Action?, 2016).
Definition of Affirmative Action
Affirmative action is a set of public positive policies and practices designed to help eliminate past and present discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin, against minorities in the search of employments, admission to colleges and universities or some government contracts (What is "Affirmative Action" and why is it so controversial?, 2016). Affirmative action is an effort to encourage equal opportunity between everybody and it is frequently established in government and educational sites to guarantee that minority groups inside a society are included in all programs.
The intent of Affirmative Action legislation
When first started at the federal level following passage of the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964, affirmative action was designed to counteract the remaining effects of generations of past discrimination. The intent of affirmative action legislation was to extend equal opportunity for employment and financial improvement to those who in the past were automatically excluded. Affirmative action seeks to create more opportunities for women and minorities by giving them particular consideration and more choices relating in hiring, firing, promotion, college admissions, and government contracts. In all of these areas, women and minorities traditionally have been underrepresented.
The Bakke v. Regents case conclusion
Landmark Supreme Court scenario imposed limitations on the affirmative action for ensuring that giving the greater options for minorities may not come at cost of rights of majority. Affirmative action had been unfair when it led towards the reverse discrimination. Scenario included University of California, Davis, and Medical School that had 2 different admissions pools, one for the standard applicants along with other for the minority as well as economically disadvantaged students.
Allan Bakke, the white applicant had been rejected two times even if there had been minority applicants admitted with particularly low scores apart from his. Bakke maintained it judging him depending on his race had been violation of Equal Protection Clause of 14thAmendment.
Court held in the closely divided decision that race might be one of factors considered while choosing several student body within university admissions decisions.
But, Court in addition held, that utilization of quotas in that affirmative action programs had not been permitted. Supreme Court had split 5 to 4 in their decision on Bakke case as well as addressed just minimal number of several complicated problems, which had sprung up of affirmative action. As the outcome of decision, Bakke had admitted to medical school along with graduated in year 1982 (Court, 2016).
The basis for the conclusion
Conclusion of case had been dependent on Title VI of Civil Rights Act of year 1964 as well as equal Protection Clause. Clause said that; No person within US should, on ground of race, color/national origin, be excluded from participation within, being denied advantage of or being subjected towards discrimination in any program/activity getting Federal financial assistance.
Mr. Justice Powell, Mr. Justice Brennan, Mr. Justice White, Mr. Justice Marshall along with Mr. Justice Blackmun summarized following: Title VI proscribes just such racial classifications, which might violate Equal Protection Clause when employed through State or their agencies. Racial and also ethnic classifications of any kind have been inherently suspect and also call for most exacting judicial scrutiny. Whereas objective of attaining the diverse student body has sufficiently been compelling to justify consideration of the race within admissions decisions in certain situations, petitioner's special admissions program that forecloses consideration to persons such as respondent has been unnecessary towards attainment of this compelling objective and thus invalid in Equal Protection Clause.
As petitioner might not satisfy their burden of proving such respondent might not have been admitted even when there are no special admissions programs, he should also be admitted. Racial classifications call for the strict judicial scrutiny. However, purpose of overcoming the substantial, chronic minority underrepresentation within medical profession has sufficiently been essential for justifying the remedial use of race of petitioner. Therefore, judgment below should be reversed in that it avoids race from being utilized like the factor within the university admissions (Court, 2016).
Positive and negative results of Affirmative Action legislation
We all know that everything in life has their positive and negative effects, which is also the case of the affirmative action legislation. One of the positive results of the affirmative action legislative is an increase in hiring women and black people. Enterprises try their best to hire at least 25 percent of women, 25 percent of black, and another 50 percent of men. The negative consequences of it was the fact that the majority society considered the minority to be less qualified than their white complements.
They also feel that this law was forcing them to hire less qualified black people in organizations just to fill in the positions. The biggest negative with Affirmative Action is the focus on employment and the lack of focus on ownership because the minority fields can have all the other positions and remain subordinates but they still cannot have the leadership ones.
Conclusion
In today's work environment, affirmative action is not appropriate because they are so many other laws fishing against discrimination and trying to reinforce, solidify workers' rights and protect all employees at the workforce from any kind of discrimination and others mistreatments. That is way it is important for all employees to know the laws and their rights when they are employed at an organization.
References
Court, U. S. (2016). University of California Regents v. Bakke, 1978. Retrieved from: https://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=438&invol=265.
What is "Affirmative Action" and why is it so controversial? (2016). Retrieved from: https://www.thisnation.com/question/044.html.
What is Affirmative Action? (2016). Retrieved from https://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-affirmative-action.htm.