Reverse Discrimination

Ethics behind diversity programs

Currently, the most important sources of communication are those that have appeared due to globalization and technology improvements, such as social media. This new way of communicating has made it possible for people to share information quickly all over the world (PS Magazine, 2014). As a result, society is more aware of institutions ́ actions, and acts that may be interpreted as discrimination are being pointed out and criticized (Rome-Reports, 2014). This has led institutions to be careful with their image to make efforts to reflect diversity among the organization and its members. In order to reflect an environment of inclusion, some institutions are trying to integrate a fixed percentage of minorities, regardless of the possibility that there may be other candidates, more capable in terms of knowledge and abilities (Harvard Business School, 2011). This tendency creates a new way of discrimination that affects third parties. This is why it is important to discuss the ethics of diversity-based programs.

Based on Kant ́s moral philosophy, an action is moral if it treats humanity never as a means to an end, but always as an end. (Alexander and Moore, 2012) It is common that universities ́ diversity programs boast of increasing student diversity using only their immigrant student population to feed this image of supporting the American dream (Ford, 2014). ”Unfortunately, many students walk around feeling their own category is not properly in benefit programs and scholarships" (Ponterotto, 1987, p.218). These programs claim that the main objective is to compensate the groups that tend to be victims of discriminative treatment. However, sometimes the ones receiving this compensation may have never been victims of discrimination (Nagai, 2002). Therefore, the program is not benefiting the ones who should be, and the intentions of the organization are reflected as merely to benefit their image, using minorities as means to this end. Thus, according to Kant ́s moral philosophy, diversity-based programs are immoral.



Virtue ethics state that people who act with virtues act morally. Virtues are well entrenched in its possessor and are concerned with many other actions as well, with emotions, choices, values, desires, perceptions, etc. (Hursthouse, 2013). Equality as a virtue doesn ́t mean thinking about how to make everyone feel 'good and accepted' in society, but rather how to not make others feel 'superior by nature (Pewewardy,2013). Diversity programs usually do not benefit all minorities; these programs are targeted to specific groups which include African Americans and Hispanics (Rosenberg, 2011). Nowadays, organizations are expected to engage in equal employment practices that satisfy multiple objectives, the most important of are building a workforce that mirrors an increasingly diverse society: if not, private employers are often vulnerable to legal attacks by concerned parties (Gullet, 2000). According to virtue ethics, for equality to be considered a virtue, it should involve perceptions, emotions and desires of making everybody feel equal, not just fear of being judged by law or criticized by society. Institutions cannot argue that they fight for equality with inclusion programs if they give aid to some minorities but forget to promote equality for all members. Therefore, according to virtue ethics, it is immoral to benefit minorities just to reflect diversity in an organization.

According to actual consequentialism, whether an act is morally right depends only on the actual consequences (as opposed to foreseen, intended, or likely consequences) (Sinnott-Armstrong, 2014). Reviewing real cases, there was a shoe company with a training program that based entrance on company seniority, but reserved half of the training positions for African American workers. Thus, less senior minority workers were given preference over others (Gullett, 2000). Another similar case happened in the Department of Transportation, which considered race and gender as factors in hiring decisions. Dianne J. was rated high but not highest. Nevertheless, using the "gender factor" as a part of the decision, the director chose Ms. Joyce to fill the opening (Gullett, 2000). The last example took place at the University of Virginia, where information from the SAT ́s results showed white admittees have the highest scores, Asian and Hispanic scores are slightly lower, while scores of black admittees are much lower. However, according to the author,



75 percent of blacks were admitted with low verbal scores (Nagai, 2002). The intention to aid minorities does not determine the morality of the act. Instead, the action of benefiting them is considered immoral, according to actual consequentialism, since it promotes unequal treatment for other employees. Therefore, according to an actual consequentialism, it is immoral to benefit minorities over others in order to reflect diversity.

On the contrary, different theories find that favoring minorities, regardless of the fact that sometimes it is merely to satisfy the needs of institutions, is a moral practice. For example, the agent-centered deontological theory focused on actions. (Moore, 2008). As Moore mentions, this approach states that intention is not involved in determining the morality of an action. A program established to consider race and gender in employment decisions must be designed to break down old patterns of racial segregation (Gullet, 2000). Also, it was found that some minorities (Asian, Black, and Latino) reported more personal experiences with ethnic discrimination than others (Sellers, 2003). A diversity-based program usually makes inference of past discrimination in order to aid the ones who need it the most (Gullet, 2000). Although intentions might focus on creating a more diverse labor force, these theories state the importance of the action over the intention, and the action, as Sellers explains throughout his work, is to give minorities the opportunities they hadn ́t had before. Therefore, according to these agent-centered theories, to benefit minorities is a moral practice.

Plato and Aristotle agree that the development of excellent moral character requires that individuals come to seek the good of others for others' own sakes (Homiak, 2011). Participants involved in diversity-based programs begin to learn more about issues of diversity and privilege, which will empower them to create a more inclusive and just society for all (Lutterman, 2003). When trying to retain women and other minority groups in an institution, organizational accommodations (child care centers, services, assistance) are provided to them in order to lessen the stress of balancing demands of work and home