How exactly does affirmative action work? Is there some kinda quota companies required to keep? (I find that hard to believe)
I ask because my sister recently had a job on a temporary basis with the possibility for full time employment. When it was time to see if she was going to stay on her boss said they where not going to keep her on. She wanted to know the reason so she called back and asked him if there was something she did wrong or something she should have done better. He said she did a very good job, was never late, and very dependable, ect… and then he said (she can’t remember the exact phrasing) that he needed to hire more males and minorities and that is why he couldn’t hire her. Implying that there was some kinda quota they have to meet. (FYI we are blond hair and blue eye… and as white as white can be). This sounds like a very odd thing to tell someone… and it seems very shady to me.
Affirmative action varies tremendously in implementation. A few places literally do quotas, and they also get all the media “attention.”
A lot of places do things quite different than quotas. I’ve worked in colleges and participated in hiring and admissions with affirmative actions goals and never, ever, once saw anything remotely close to quotas. You spend more time hunting, asking questions, broadening the search. And it works. (More diversity and better overall quality.) But that doesn’t appear on Fox News.
In nearly all cases, affirmitive action means that the employer works to get qualified minorities to apply, and to consider them strongly for positions. It is not a quota system, though – it’s perfectly legitimate to hire anyone you want as long as you try to recruit minorities and can show that those you did hire were clearly qualified for the job.
From time-to-time, someone tries to make it into a quota system. In this case, it sounds like the employer is using it for an excuse: He didn’t want to say the real reasons why he didn’t want to hire your sister, so used affirmative action as a scapegoat.
Quotas have been barred for a long time now. The area of affirmative action has been severely complicated for years because of several Supreme Court decisions with mulitple opinions. One, quite literally, had to count justices in order to figure out what the rules were.
It is further complicated by several other factors, including whether the employer or school is public or private and whether there was an existing court order governing the admission or hiring practices. But you can’t do quotas. You may remember the two recent school admission cases Grutter and Gratz
Those cases addressed whether a school could take race into account at all when making admission decisions.
The upshot was that the school needed a very good reason to do so.
One thing is clear, though. If your sister’s employer did not hire her because she is female, it better have had a good reason for that decision.
I don’t know why your sister did not get the job, but she should consider contacting the EEOC and your state civil rights department and telling them her story. She may be able to sue.
If there are government contracts involved, then the general policy is that the labor force should roughly resemble the general population. This gets enforced because all these dweebs have reports to do about racial and sexual distribution of the work force.
In the private sector things are a little different. It’s much hard to prove discrimination. Still, if you tell someone you aren’t going to hire them because of race, sex, or creed, there is a possibility for a complaint. An EEOC complaint takes about 3 years to finish. Lots of lawyer fees. Usually the lawyer will get over 60% of whatever is won. Which means the offense has to be really bad.
The government will try some cases on its own, but only if it wants to make a point and only if the case is so egregious that it will make headlines in the NY Times. And then the only thing you’re likely to win is lost wages. And you still have to go back and work with people who didn’t want you there to start with.
And a private sector employer with no government contracts can basically fire you for no reason at all. You work at the whim of your employer unless you have a Union, a personnel manual or that employer has government contracts.
*Originally posted by hroeder *
**In the private sector things are a little different. It’s much hard to prove discrimination. Still, if you tell someone you aren’t going to hire them because of race, sex, or creed, there is a possibility for a complaint. An EEOC complaint takes about 3 years to finish. **
Actually, it takes much less time for the EEOC to finish its job. And filing a complaint with the EEOC is free. You don’t need a lawyer to help you.
The government will try some cases on its own, but only if it wants to make a point and only if the case is so egregious that it will make headlines in the NY Times. And then the only thing you’re likely to win is lost wages. And you still have to go back and work with people who didn’t want you there to start with.
No. The EEOC won’t sue for you. You will have to hire lawyer. I know of no lawyer who will charge you a 60% fee. If the fee is contingent, the standard is usually 33%, most ethics agree that the maximum fee allowed on a contingent basis is 49%. And many of the statutes permit an award of attorneys’ fees. So the fee burden is not huge.
**And a private sector employer with no government contracts can basically fire you for no reason at all. You work at the whim of your employer unless you have a Union, a personnel manual or that employer has government contracts. **
The employer cannot fire you for being a woman or a non-minority.
The employer cannot fire you for being a woman or a non-minority.
Nor can they fire you for being a man.
Actually, an employer cannot legally fire you for being a man, a woman and/or a minority. That employers often do – and get away with it – is a separate issue.
The original Exec order was to forbid feds, federal contractors and subcontractors from discriminating against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, skin color, religion, gender, or national origin.
Later, revisions to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 501 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, & orders such as EEOC Equal Employment Opportunity Management Directive 715 (aka MD 715)and Court cases (including the Supreme Court) provided implemenation guidance and added age and and disability status as protected categories.
Later still, some localities (and states?WAG there) added sexual orienation.
Just think it is important that while we tend to think black/white on EEO/Affirmative Action – it is really more than that