|
Myth: |
Affirmative action is no longer necessary for women.
|
|
Reality: |
Discrimination continues to deny women opportunities
in many fields. In construction, for instance, women
were still only 2.1% of the workforce in 1995. Full-time
working women earn less than 74% of men’s earnings
nationally. According to the U. S. Department of Labor’s
Glass Ceiling Commission Report (1995), women make
up 46% of the national work force, but represent only
5% of top management at Fortune 2000 industrial and
service firms. White men comprise 43% of the work
force, but hold 95% of senior management positions.
|
|
Myth: |
There are already laws against discrimination in
employment. We don’t need affirmative action,
too.
|
|
Reality: |
Civil rights laws don’t address subtle institutional
discrimination. Through affirmative action, employers
and educational institutions engage in outreach, recruitment,
and training to remedy past and existing discrimination. |
|
Myth: |
Affirmative action gives preference to undeserving
women and people of color solely on the basis of their
gender and/or race.
|
|
Reality: |
Affirmative action does not mean the hiring of unqualified
people. In fact, these activities are specifically
prohibited by law. Affirmative action allows competent
and qualified women and minorities to compete and
excel in areas where they are or have been under-represented.
|
|
Myth: |
Affirmative action forces employers to set quotas
for the number of women and minorities they will employ.
|
|
Reality: |
Quotas are illegal in affirmative action programs.
Employers set targets (goals) for the employment of
women and minorities and a time frame for achieving
their targets. There are no legal penalties if goals
are not met, as long as good faith efforts to achieve
them are made. |
|
Myth: |
Affirmative action results in “reverse”
discrimination against white men. |
|
Reality: |
A recent report by the Department of Labor found
that of more than 3,000 discrimination opinions in
Federal district courts from 1990-94, fewer than 100
were claims of “reverse” discrimination. Of
these, discrimination against white men was established
in only six cases.
|
|
Myth: |
Unqualified people are being hired
and promoted to fulfill affirmative action requirements. |
|
Reality: |
When affirmative action programs are administered
properly, only qualified people are hired. Poorly
managed affirmative action programs may, on occasion,
result in a corruption of policies. It is explicitly
illegal to establish quotas and fill them with regard
only to the race or gender of the applicant. Abuses
of the programs must not be allowed—nor should
they be used as an excuse to abolish affirmative action
programs altogether.
|
|
Myth: |
Affirmative action undermines an employer’s
ability to make employment decisions based on merit.
|
|
Reality: |
Affirmative action was created precisely because
decisions were not being made based on merit. In seeking
to achieve its goals, an employer is never required
to hire a person who lacks the qualifications needed
to perform the job successfully, or hire a less qualified
person over a more qualified one.
|
|
Myth: |
Affirmative action is bad for business.
|
|
Reality: |
Many prominent business leaders support
affirmative action because it widens the labor pool
of qualified candidates, introduces more competition
for jobs, and helps create a work force that reflects
the diversity of the markets that businesses serve.
As K.T. Derr, chairman of the board of Chevron Corporation,
put it: “At Chevron, promoting diversity among
our employees, contractors and suppliers is a long-term
competitive strategy that we intend to pursue whether
or not affirmative action laws require us to do so.”
|
|
Myth: |
Affirmative action should be based on social and
economic disadvantage, rather than on gender or race.
|
|
Reality: |
The idea of changing affirmative action to base it
on social or economic disadvantage ignores the reason
that affirmative action was created—to prevent
race and sex discrimination and ensure inclusion of
all qualified individuals. While socioeconomic disadvantage
could be used in addition to gender and race, it should
not take their place.
|