Evolution of Affirmative Action
The phrase affirmative action is used in the workplace with connotations of equal opportunity and social justice at the workplace. The introduction of affirmative action into the American workplace was due to civil rights movements in the 1940s. The civil rights movements that gained traction after World War II fought for the rights of people of color. It had become clear that the rights of minority groups such as Black, Asian, and women minorities were not afforded the same rights in the workplace. This became a problem that soon needed to be addressed on the national level. The first instance that affirmative action was discussed in the national arena was by President John F. Kennedy. However, the affirmative action clause entered into legislation under the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which rendered it actionable. The goal of the study is to review how the affirmative action rule evolves fifty years since its inception.
The affirmative action concept developed in a bid to ensure that there was a level playing field in various sectors of employment. Today affirmative action is essential as an interdisciplinary subject that touches on multiple areas such as law, work, and human resource management, and even economics. Affirmative action originated from the civil rights movements that gained traction in the 1940s and 1950s. Affirmative action is a safeguard targeting minority races, such as African Americans and Asians (Harris, 2015). It is also devised to offer protection to other minorities, such as women and people with disabilities. The emancipation from slavery heralded the first step towards affirmative action; in that, it freed the slaves from slavery and forced labor.
It is generally accepted that the emancipation of slavery did not do much in ensuring that free Black people could easily access work. Indeed, the freed slaves were often worse off since they were left to their devices without proper mechanisms being put in place to ensure they could work for fair wages. Often, African American was subjected to dismal working conditions, meager wages if any, and abuse, both physical and mental, from their employers (Harris, 2015). The civil rights movements of the 1950s and women’s rights movement put pressure on the government to ensure that minorities received equal treatment with the majority characterized by the Male White.
The discussion that culminated in the addition of the affirmative action clause was rife with disagreements on the actual meaning and interpretation of the term. Affirmative action is often a tool to advance the cause of African Americans to the detriment of the Whites. Additionally, it was thought of as pitting the Black people against the White people, an argument that led to opposition from predominantly White people. A perfect example of this is the Civil Rights Case decided in 1883 in which the Supreme Court declared that the Civil Rights Act of 1875 could only regulate state and not individuals (Beydoun & Wilson, 2017). In a dissent by Justice Harlan, he stated that the decision failed to take into consideration the intent of the framers of the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constitution to eliminate all ‘burdens which constitute the badges of slavery and servitude.’ He further stated that the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution was enacted to protect the African Americans from the overt act of racism from both state actors and individuals (Crosby et al., 2016)).
A report undertaken by the then Vice President Richard Nixon identified and laid bare the fact that systemic and overt discrimination still occurred in many places, including places of work. More so, the report indicated that even where overt discrimination was not present, subtle forms of racism and discrimination existed in the workplace. The report culminated in Executive Order 10925 made by President Kennedy, which prohibited and directed contractors to take affirmative action in ensuring that there was no discrimination at the workplace based on race.
The Civil Rights Act of 1964 sought to add another layer of protection for minority groups in employment. Titles VI and VII of the Act direct that employers take affirmative action to eliminate all forms of discrimination at the workplace based on race or gender (Beydoun & Wilson, 2017). The sections in the Act were followed by the Executive Order of 1965 which required that all contractors include in their employment policies, a written affirmation not to discriminate anyone based on the race and gender (Beydoun & Wilson, 2017). The addition of the gender clause was critical in ensuring that the affirmative action clause was not only geared at protecting the African American Minorities only but also sought to protect other minorities such as women from workplace discrimination. Different Executive Orders that implemented even attempted further protections from discrimination, such as requiring all federal agencies to include an affirmative action clause and ensure the provision of equal opportunity in employment.
Affirmative action programs have been implemented in various fields of employment, and the concept has often evolved to protect women and other minority groups, such as people with disabilities. The affirmative action plans undertaken by various administrations have usually received a lot of opposition in that it is seen as unfair since it is seen to favor minority groups over other people. This discussion has often been seen in the decisions of the courts, especially those that touch on the issue of civil rights. The objectives that the affirmative action clause sought to fulfill is constant, and it will evolve as the societal needs change. The renewal of the peaceful protests against systemic racism in the new decade has underscored the importance of affirmative action in all facets of employment.
References
Beydoun, K. A., & Wilson, E. K. (2017). Reverse Passing. UCLA L. Rev., 64, 282.
Crosby, F., Iyer, A. & Sincharoen, S. (2016). Understanding Affirmative Action. Annual review of psychology, 57, 585-611.
Harris, G. L. (2015) Revisiting Affirmative Action in Leveling the Playing Field: Who Have Been the True Beneficiaries Anyway? Review of Public Personnel Information, 29(4), 354-378.
Landmark Legislation: Civil Rights Act of 1875 (2018) https://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/CivilRightsAct1875.htm Retrieved on 24th June 2020.