Tải bản đầy đủ
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 vs. the California Civil Rights Initiative

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 vs. the California Civil Rights Initiative

Tải bản đầy đủ

Gradations of Affirmative Action
• An equal opportunity to apply
• Requires employers to advertise in minority-seen outlets .
• Race as a tie-breaker
• Race may break a tie between equally situated candidates.
• Acceptance of all qualified minorities
• Used most often in university admissions to selective
schools. A standard is set and qualified minorities are
admitted and the remaining spots are filled with the best
of the non-minority pool.
• Guidelines
• Targets are set for minority hiring and promotion and, if
they are not met, a justification must be given.
• Quotas
• Strict percentages of minorities must be hired. This is
generally unconstitutional unless ordered by a court to
remedy past discrimination.

McGraw-Hill/Irwin

©2012 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All Rights Reserved

29-26
1-26

The University of Michigan Case
• Undergraduate Admission
System
• Based on a point system that gave points
for academic achievement, race, etc.
• Found unconstitutional

• Graduate Admission System
• Based on the desire to achieve a critical
mass of minority students
• Found constitutional

McGraw-Hill/Irwin

©2012 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All Rights Reserved

29-27
1-27

Myths of Affirmative Action
Roland Fryer and Glenn Loury
• Myth #1 Affirmative Action Can Involve Goals and
Timetables while Avoiding Quotas
• Myth #2 Color-Blind Policies Offer an Efficient Substitute
for Color-Sighted Affirmative Action.
• Myth #3 Affirmative Action Undercuts the Incentive to
Invest in Yourself
• Myth #4 Equal Opportunity is Enough to Ensure Racial
Equality
• Myth #5 The Earlier in the Better
• Myth #6 Many Nonminority Citizens are Directly
Affected by Affirmative Action
• Myth #7 Affirmative Action Always Helps its
Beneficiaries
McGraw-Hill/Irwin

©2012 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All Rights Reserved

29-28
1-28