Affirmative Action

The model of affirmative action was created as a result of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. In Moral Issues in Business, 10th Edition, affirmative action is described as a program designed to take race or sex into account as part of an effort to correct imbalances in employment that exist as a result of past discrimination. (Shaw & Barry (2007) p. 465-466. In 1961, President John F. Kennedy signed Executive Order 10925, which made all federal contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 followed, prohibiting all forms of discrimination based on race, color, sex, religion, or national origin (Shaw & Barry, 2007,0p. 461). The Civil Rights act came at the height of the civil rights movement and it forced the diversification of business and schools who would otherwise continue to support segregation. Today, businesses and continuing education institutions are required to have an affirmative action programs to ensure they have people of all races and both genders represented in their population.

Selecting applicants based on anything other than merit is ethically, morally, and legally wrong. However, affirmative action does exactly that. Affirmative action considers one’s gender or race and makes decisions regarding schooling and work based on skin color and gender. It discriminates against non-minorities to compensate for past discrimination against minorities. Minorities who receive appointments must examine if their appointment was a result of merit or affirmative action. Others may resent the loss of opportunity based on their own race or gender. It is likely that resentment grows because of affirmative action and we become as a society. We should abandon affirmative action because it promotes reverse racism, it harms those it is intended to benefit, and it divides us as a society.

The newest discrimination against the white male is called reverse racism or reverse discrimination and is morally wrong. Affirmative action is designed to end discrimination by giving the opportunities to minorities first. This causes the white male to be discriminated against for those positions awarded to minorities. The white male loses an opportunity based solely on his race and gender, which is completely opposite of what affirmative action is supposed to do. J. Messerli describes an example of this in a white male who works harder and is more qualified than a minority for a position but is passed over because he is not a minority. (Messerli, 2007) Critics of affirmative action have argued that the ideas of equal employment opportunity sounds great in principle. In practice affirmative action has become a program that conceals unjust, harmful and probably unconstitutional practices by giving preference to some at the expense of others (Yates, 1997). Affirmative action programs employers and school officials discriminate against whites that are more qualified by first selecting a minority regardless of qualifications. The result of affirmative action in some organizations is the creating of quotas to meet legal the legal requirements of affirmative action. The number of minorities that have to be hired and promoted dictates appointments awarded instead of basing it in the best person for the job (Yates, 1997). Yates explains that individual rights have been replaced with group entitlement (Yates, 1997). In the scenario where a minority may be the most qualified person for a job, sometimes they still only got the job because of their skin color.

J. Messerli explains that lower standards are set for minorities then for white students and job applicants. This means that students or employees that are minorities don’t have to work as hard because they are put at the front of the line over the whites without as much regard for performance. (Messerli, 2007) An example might be a white student who has a 4.0 grade-point average as required to get into Harvard; however, the position goes to a minority student that has the grade-point average of 3.4 because the school needs to fill the minority position first. This shows the compromise of standards throughout the economy and the educational system by rewarding people based on policies rather than on merit (Yates, 1997).

For the minority, whether the most qualified candidate or not, he or she is in a difficult situation. They would never be certain that they were awarded a position based on their merit or because of their minority status. As we look back on the past 46 years we can see that Affirmative Action has actually hurt the people it was intended to help. Those who have been admitted to schools or have had their careers advanced because of affirmative action are labeled historically disadvantaged. One that has benefited from affirmative action is perceived as a someone that has not achieved status on his or her own merit. This perception is not only from others but also from within.

Affirmative action hurts the supposed beneficiaries by advancing people that are not qualified just to fill quotas. A person who is black may be hired or promoted because of their color of their skin. This places a person in position where they are not competent to perform their duties, which is more harmful than helpful to that person as well as to the business. An example is the New York City Police Department that hired criminals to ensure there were a certain number of blacks on the force. The stigma that is associated with those who have benefited from affirmative action can actually hurt their careers. “The main victims of affirmative action are the most qualified and talented members of the "beneficiary" groups. Talented women and minorities are presumed to be mediocre and to be in their positions because of quotas and promotion of the under-qualified. The entire group is forced by the reverse discrimination to bear the stigma of "second rate". (Plaut, 1997) Regardless of the reason they were awarded the position, it is likely that others will question their merit and resent the appointment.

The Yale Daily News reports that the workload for those who have entered Yale Law School may be too much to handle for people that were admitted because of Affirmative Action. This puts the student in a position where she/he can not succeed as they were not prepared to enter such a difficult program. (Courtney