AboutJohn Fuller Expertise I can answer questions pertaining to Affirmative Action, how an affirmative action plan is developed, definitations included within an affirmative action plan, goals versus quotas, misperceptions, rolling out the affirmative action plan with specific action items and areas that are action items. I can answer questions pertaining to Civil Rights violations, investigations of violations and methods and means to be proactive to ensure awareness of civil rights. I am not an attorney and cannot answer or provide information relating to legal, court-related, or case law.
Experience Experience in the area
Diversity,EEO, and Affirmative Action Officer for Johns Hopkins Hospital
EEO, Ethics, and Affirmative Action Officer for Fortune 300
Deputy Director, Equal Opportunity for the Department of Defense
Equal Opportunity Management Institute
Organizations
Board of Directors, National Council for Support of Disability Issues
Board of Direcdtors, Institute for MultiTrack Diplomacy
Maryland Association of Affirmative Action Officers
Publications
Guest expert discussing discrimination, sexual harassment in the workplace and affirmative action on over 45 radio stations nationwide
Education/Credentials
Doctor of Education
Master of Science, Leadership & Business Ethics
Master of Arts, Education
Virginia and Florida Supreme Court Certified Mediator
Department of Defense Certified Mediator
Question What are the strongest arguments that a defender of affirmative action could use to rebut the reverse discrimination charge? How persuasive do ou find these argument? Do you agree that even if affirmative action policies discriminate against white men, the potential benefits from affirmative action far outweigh the potential costs? Do you think that this type of cost-benefit analysis is relevant to understanding the ethic of affirmative action?
Answer Hi Sheri,
Your questions are a source of continual ethical and moral inquiry that permeates the entire equal employment opportunity profession and those who are outside of the profession and affected by it.
To your first question, there is actually no such thing as reverse discrimination. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act protects every employee from discrimination based upon national origin, disability, sex, religion, race, or color. Color is not relegated to colors other than white and is also a distinguished category from race. Therefore a white male or white female can bring a charge of racial or color discrimination against another without using the term reverse.
To your second question, there are no real "affirmative action policies" only those laws that pertain to having an affirmative action plan as required by the Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs. If you read the actual wording most affirmative action plans that are normally contained within them, the disclaimers abound particularly that the data is basically not necessarily relevant. That being said, the goals established in affirmative action plans are actually those which are purely business related and reflect market parity. Market parity as it relates to recruiting is a business recruiting to the actual percentage of minorities who are qualified for the position for which you are applying in your metropolitan recruiting zone. The key is the word qualified since you are not actually recruiting to the actual percentage of minorities in the recruiting zone but actual qualified. This of course can be expanded when you are recruiting for executive level position but again it is qualified and not percentage alone.
I do believe that this type of cost benefit analysis is not only relevant to understanding the ethics of affirmative action but also is an actual cost benefit to a company or institution.
I do not believe that affirmative action plans can discriminate unless people who use them are ignorant of how they should be constructed or if there are pressures to achieve a quota versus a goal. If quotas are established (which are not legal unless court ordered), then there would be actual discrimination if one race were hired against another. Court ordered quotas to remedy past discrimination are acceptable but only for the limited time established by the court.
The current court case being decided next month by the US Supreme Court may have far reaching implications to the future of affirmative action. If you have any more questions, please do not hesitate to ask.
