The New
Affirmative Action
By: Elizabeth Lane
Final Writing Project
Genre: Booklet
Audience: Business owners
Purpose: Promote a new
plan for affirmative action
What is Affirmative Action?
A brief history.
What is the exact definition?
In 1961, when the term affirmative action was first As
used in Executive Order 10925, the quest for nondiscriminatory employment began. It wasn’t until
1965, when Lyndon Johnson issued Executive
Order 11246, that affirmative action became
required by all government agencies as well as
business with significant contracts with the
government. As described by Carl Kogut and Larry
Short, AA was needed to ensure fair employment
during a time in which discrimination was
prominent.
How is it implemented?
As described in Managing Human
Resources,
companies first conduct a “utilization analysis” to
determine demographics of the current workforce
to that of the companies. Next, if these percentages
are not proportional, a plan is created in order to
correct the underutilization of minority group
members.
stated in Webster’s Dictionary, the
definition of Affirmative Action today is “an
active effort (as through legislation) to improve
the employment or educational opportunities
of members of minority groups or women”.
What changes have occurred?
 Over
the past 50 years, “by 2000, Congress
and the executive branch had provided
sufficient legislation and directives to eliminate
underrepresentation of all minority group
members in the federal workforce.” (Kogut,
Short)
 In
Antonio Sisneros’ article "Revisiting
Affirmative Action Case Law", it is descried how
in the case of Griggs v. Duke Power Co, the
Supreme Court ruled it discriminatory to create
a required test that ultimately favors one race
over another. This was a huge problem as many
companies at the time would make unrealistic
and unnecessary requirements in order to
discriminate without having to call it
discrimination. Once this case set the
precedents for how companies could treat
applicants, it made it harder to discriminate
discretely.
What are the intended
benefits for companies?
 In his article, Shawn Woodhouse describes
how AA can enabled companies to “recruit,
promote, and retain qualified members of
excluded groups.” By working to level the
playing field in the workforce, AA gave
government agencies and contacted
companies a taste of diversity, which really
benefits a company. People who might
never have been considered before were
beginning to hold important positions and
improved business and productivity for
their company. An example of this is seen
in Pearson Custom Business Resources text
book. It describes how “greater creativity”
is created because different types of people
bring different ideas to the table. “Better
problem solving” also resulted from AA
because of “groupthink”, when all members
decide on a mistaken decisions due to their
same mindset, was less common. When
different people are included into the
mix, this homogenous way of thinking shrinks.
“Greater system flexibility” is also mentioned as a
beneficial attribute because the inclusion of
different people can generate an an environment
open to new ideas and alternate ways of doing
things. Lastly, AA has lead companies to retain
“better information” because each individual
brings with him or her unique skills and different
perspectives, which ultimately leads to data.
What is actually being seen in
the workplace?
 Instead of viewing this change as a potential
benefit to their company, complaints from
majority members are staggering, claiming
unfair practices regarding the hiring process.
Because majority groups
“Preferential affirmative
members feel that jobs
action patronizes
American blacks, women, are being taken by under
and others by presuming
qualified people simply
that they cannot succeed
because AA requires it,
on their own.” – Alan
Keyes
they resist the change.
These people are resistant to AA because they
believe AA consists of a quota based system that
completely disregards hiring based on merit and
performance.
To the majority group members, it is viewed as an
initiative that hurts whites in order to help
minorities, or in other words, is a form of reverse
discrimination. In an article by Burns, Prue, and
Schapper, they discuss how tension in the
workplace has risen so intensely, blatant acts of
disobedience are a constant occurrence and
employee anxiety has caused “resistance to
action”.
Not
only is there now a strong tension
within organizations, but Pearson Business
Resources text book also describes how due to
this feeling of resentment, high powered women
and minorities are not taken seriously and
therefor not given the respect that other
authority figures are receiving. Due to this idea
that majorities are now getting “the short end of
the stick”, they are actually beginning to take out
their frustration out on their women and
minority co-workers. Overall, it is this lack of
understanding among the workforce that is
causing such strong tension and resentment and
ultimately leading affirmative action to be less
successful than it could be.
Has it actually helped?
 Even
after the advances it has made,
Kogut and Short describe how after “40
years of intensive affirmative action efforts
the federal government continues to
employ a disproportionate number of
minority group members than would be
expected from their representation in the
labor force.” Even after years of
tremendous effort and quite a bit of
regulation, there still seems to be an
unequal number of minorities who hold
government positions.
And what about the private
business sector?
 Due
to the nature of the affirmative
action, it only affects government agencies
as well as business that do a decent
amount
of
contracting
with
the
government. But when it comes to the
private sector, there are no requirements to
ensure that everyone has an equal
opportunity to succeed.
Effects on small businesses?
 For
some companies, it has become
increasingly difficult to follow the regulations
set forth by affirmative action. As we know, the
percent of minority workers within the
organization has to be proportional to the
amount of minority workers in the labor
market. Fred Fry describes how these
requirements make it hard for little companies
to compete in the labor market with larger,
more established companies. Ultimately, it
puts them at a competitive disadvantage and
results in large fines imposed upon them.
The New Plan
How will it be different?

Instead of focusing purely on the hiring process, the
new affirmative action program should instead
work on how to recruit a wider variety of people so
that everyone is given a chance. It will encourage
aggressive outreach programs to attract a wide
variety of qualified and diversified people. Along
with this, there will also be a mandatory training
process that each company involved in meeting AA
requirement should have to conduct that explains
what it is, as well as how it can better the company.
This training will be done company wide and will
include current employees as well as new hires.
How will it help small businesses?

In order to help those small businesses that feel the
struggles of meeting government regulation while
also remaining in business, the new plan will give
tax breaks for companies that conduct these
training and recruiting practices. This tax break will
also be extended to private companies who chose to
promote diversity through the same training and
recruiting practices.
Companies who adequately use the training practices
are increase their diversity ratio discussed earlier,
they will be given a tax break of 10%. This same tax
refund will be given to companies who conduct
aggressive outreach programs to bring in a qualified
and diversified group of applicants
How will this help?
By doing this, majority employees will
get a better understanding of the initiative and will be
less likely to feel angry and resentful toward their
new, diverse team. As Deborah Dagit, Silicon Graphics
Director of Diversity Initiatives said, “Management
training sessions are designed to help managers
bridge communication gaps they might not even
realize exist”. Unlike with the current program,
affirmative action will not only extend into the hiring
practice, but in every area of business, leading to a
real change in the culture of our entire workforce.
Not only will this plan effect government agencies
and companies affiliated with the government, but
any organization that desires to become more diverse
and promotes this diversity through AA initiatives.
How you can help?
 The
same way in which people have
changed the laws throughout history, this
is the way that we will be able to change
affirmative action to create a more equal
society. By going to your politicians,
writing letters, and showing your
encouragement for
not only the
reenactment of affirmative action but the
new plan proposed here.
 Petition
your government to hear your
voice and together we can create a world
in which everyone has an equal
opportunity to succeed. With this new
plan, hopefully one day we will no longer
need laws or initiatives to regulate
equality in the workplace. Our culture is
changing, its time business did too.
References

“Affirmative Action.” Merriam- Webster Dictionary. Legal Dictionary. 1996.

Fry, Fred L. "Affirmative Action How It Affects Small Business." American Journal of Small
Business 5.2 (1980): 23-29. Business Source Complete. EBSCO. Web. 6 Oct. 2011.

Gomez-Mejia, Luis, David Balkin, and Robert Candy. Managing Human Resources. 6. Boston: Pearson
Learning Soluntions, 2010. Print.

Kogut, Carl A., and Larry E. Short. "Affirmative Action in Federal Employment: Good Intentions Run
Amuck?" Public Personnel Management 36.3 (2007): 197-206. Business Source Complete. EBSCO. Web.
6 Oct. 2011.

Kordys, Justin, et al. "White Americans' opposition to affirmative action: Group interest and the harm to
beneficiaries objection." British Journal of Social Psychology 49.4 (2010): 895-903. Academic Search
Premier. EBSCO. Web. 6 Oct. 2011.

Leporini, C. (1998). Affirmative action in the workplace. Focus on Law Studies , 8(2), Retrieved
from
http://www.americanbar.org/publications/focus_on_law_studies_home/publiced_focus_spr98
work.html

Sisneros, Antonio. "Revisiting Affirmative Action Case Law." Labor Law Journal 34.6 (1983): 350-363.
Business Source Complete. EBSCO. Web. 21 Oct. 2011.

Wilcher, Shirley J. "Affirmative Action vs. Diversity." INSIGHT into Diversity (2011): 44-45. Business
Source Complete. EBSCO. Web. 6 Oct. 2011.

Woodhouse, Shawn. "The Historical Development of Affirmative Action: An Aggregated Analysis."
Western Journal of Black Studies 26.3 (2002): 155. Academic Search Premier. EBSCO. Web. 21 Oct.
2011.