Discrimination Legislation
Vernecia Denson
American Intercontinental University
March 10, 2012

In this paper, you will learn and know how to recruit for a more diverse work team. The word affirmative action will be recognized and defined. You will learn what the initial intent of Affirmative-Action legislation was and why it was created. We will distinguish what the positive and negative results of the Affirmative Action legislation and is this legislation still appropriate today. We will learn what the landmark of Bakke v. Regents case included and how it applied and ties in with affirmative action. We will see what was the basis for the conclusion of this case?

When thinking about discrimination in the workforce, the words affirmative action comes to mind. Affirmative action was a law put into action to take positive steps that would increase the representation of minorities and women in areas of employment, education, and businesses from which in historical times were excluded (Fullinwider, 2009). Affirmative action wanted to increase not noticing the basic structures based off of race, gender, or ethnicity when making decisions (Fullinwider, 2009). This action is still around till this day.
Affirmative action was initiated first by President John F. Kennedy in 1961. This order showed that Federal contractors was suppose to take affirmative action to guarantee that job applicants and employees are treated fairly and would have a fair opportunity regardless of their race, color, or national origin (Fullinwider, 2009). Three years later, the Civil Rights act will take consideration and will be defined on the same terms.
Affirmative action was first started because people thought that if they just simply tried stopping discrimination against the minorities, than that would overcome the results from past employment and promotion patterns. Earlier before the 1960s, most employers were hired by word of mouth. This ment that friends or relatives of current employees were more than likely to be hired (Fullinwider, 2009).
Initially, affirmative action was to refer to numerous activities to guarantee the fairness of hiring and promotion decisions. This was more drawn towards individuals to encourage those who were previously excluded to apply for jobs, admission to colleges, and other business that they once was turned down the opportunity (Pasour, 2011).
Kennedy’s executive order implied equal access and nothing else. The act that has come about since the 60’s is a perversion of the original intent of affirmative action.
First, affirmative action promoted the hiring of the less skilled workers. It was forcing employers to choose the best of the minority workers they could find, regardless of whether they have the required job skills. Colleges and universities frequently also had quotas for how many blacks or minorities that was necessary to admit to meet their freshman class qualifications. Years later this action would go in to add women the same opportunities that this law gave to minorities (Pasour, 2011).
One case that comes to mind when talking about affirmative action is the landmark of Bakke v. Regents case. This case took place in 1978. This case was a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that ruled unconstitutional to the admission process of the Medical School at the University of California at Davis. Which because of affirmative action, this school had to set aside 16 out of the 100 seats for African American students. This diversity in the classroom was intended as justification for considering race as one of the factors in their admissions policies in which was changed and made different from the original purpose.
Allan Bakke, a 32-year-old white male, applied to twelve medical schools in 1973 and was rejected by all twelve schools. All schools pointed out his age, stating that it was higher than their age limit. He had high GPA scores all through school and even scored in the top 3 percent on the admissions exam but his age was his downfall. He never even took into consideration of that (McBride, 2007). In 1973 and 1974, Allan Bakke applied to University of California, Davis School of Medicine, but was once again rejected in both years. Special applicants were admitted eventhough, they had lower academic scores than Bakke's. Most people of the admission committee often turned down the well qualified minority applicants claiming that a 3.4 GPA was not a 3.6 GPA. These individuals were permitted due to the fact they fit into that minority group. This group that was accepted also included the economically and educationally disadvantaged individuals (McBride, 2007). Because of this action, a lot of the whites didn’t have an opportunity and it was kind of unfair towards them. After his second rejection, Bakke filed an action in the state court for mandatory, injunctive, and declaratory relief to compel his admission to Davis. He was alleging that the special admissions program that the committee or school used for admission excluded him on the basis of his race. This was in violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. UC Davis Medical School counter-claimed for a declaration that its special admissions program was lawful (McBride, 2007).
The claim went to trial and the court found that this program operated as a racial quota because the minority applicants in that program were rated only against one another, and the 16 places in the class were reserved for just for them (McBride, 2007). Because the Medical School could not satisfy its problem of representing that, Bakke would not have been admitted. The court ordered his admission to the Medical School. Bakke began his studies at the University of California Medical School at Davis in fall of 1978, graduated in 1982, and later served as a resident at Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota.
Since the Supreme Court decided to rule with Bakke, California has banned the state's use of race as a factor to consider admission into the public schools' policies. California's Proposal mandates that the state shall not discriminate against, or grant preferential treatment to any individual or group on the basis of the individuals race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in the operation of public employment, public education, or public contracting (McBride, 2007).
The conclusion is that affirmative action cause’s reverse discrimination. Discrimination against white males is just as bad as discrimination against minorities. Some people say that affirmative action is justified as a way of making up for past discrimination. Discrimination still exists in the United States and it still exists in other parts of the world. Most blacks entering the job market today were born after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and have suffered little or no prejudice in terms of salary. When this Civil Rights Act was passed, it was not planned to reverse discrimination but to get employers to consider all applicants who were filling out job applications for jobs within their companies. The Allan Bakke Supreme Court case showed that affirmative action can cause reverse discrimination. It showed that they were willing to accept a minority student at the expense of a white student who had better credentials. There are positive and negative effects when it comes to affirmative action. The positive is that it helps individuals who are minorities and who have an economic disadvantage have an opportunity towards something that they originally wouldn’t have had a chance to experience or achieve. A lot of black ancestors had nothing to leave to their children or pass down from generation to generation like the whites and this gave them opportunities.
The negative part is that affirmative action devalues the accomplishments of people who are chosen based on the social they belong too, rather than their qualifications. It is considered a reverse discrimination. This action replaced the old wrongs with new wrongs. This law included blacks and minorities but limited white men. This also undermines the achievements of minorities, and encourages individuals to identify themselves as disadvantaged. A lot of times they are not. This action also increases racial tension in the workforce. I believe that affirmative action can now be put to rest. The United States is more equal than it will ever be. The longer this law goes on the more lawsuits there will be. The change in our economy has changed this rule as well. Blacks, Hispanics, women are no longer the lower class or uneducated. This action will be discrimative against a lower class white man looking more at his skin color and not his background. We need to look more at the qualifications of an individual and do away with affirmative action. This rule is not making anyone equal.

References
Fullinwider, R. (2009). Affirmative Action Retrieved from http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2011/entries/affirmative-action/ Pasour, E. (2011). Affirmative Action: A Counterproductive Policy. Retrieved from http://www.thefreemanonline.org/columns/affirmative-action-a-counterproductive-policy/ McBride, A. (2007). Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978). Retrieved from http://www.pbs.org/wnet/supremecourt/rights/landmark_regents.html