Is Affirmative Action Really Dead?

Since the Supreme Court’s decision in late June regarding affirmative action in college admissions, there’s been a great deal of controversy about the subject and many people weighing in on what it means for corporations and organizations. In fact, I was quoted in an article for the HR Exchange Network on the subject.

The good news according to a colleague, whose consulting practice focuses solely on helping government contractors with their affirmative action programs, is that her client base is unfazed by all the buzz. The rest of the world isn’t, though, and there is so much confusion. So, I decided to write a column for HR Exchange Network to sort out the issues.

A funny thing happened during my research. I came across an article I wrote for an anthology published by the Society of Human Resource Management (SHRM) in 2000. What I wrote then is just as relevant today. Here are some excerpts from it.

During the early 1960s, the issue of employment discrimination moved to the forefront. While policy makers were beginning to debate models to redress the discrimination in employment, racial unrest was giving rise to the Civil Rights movement. Federal civil rights laws designed to eliminate discrimination resulted.

Thirty years after President Lyndon Johnson signed [Executive Order] EO 11246, [in 1965] the use of affirmative action to achieve equal opportunity objectives is still widely debated, particularly in the media. The debate has failed to accurately describe affirmative action in the employment context and often confuses it with diversity initiatives. … For the human resources practitioner, it is important to understand the distinction between federally mandated programs such as affirmative action, and voluntary initiatives to address rapidly changing workforces.

Affirmative action in employment primarily affects companies that receive contracts from the Federal government. … These laws prohibit discrimination and require contractors to exercise outreach efforts so that protected classes have the opportunity to be hired and advance in employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, disability status or veteran status. … Its intention is to remove barriers to employment opportunities and to provide equal employment opportunity for all individuals, not to establish hiring quotas for protected groups.

Somewhere in the recent debate, the distinction between affirmative action and diversity became blurred and the terms were interchanged leading to the notion that diversity initiatives are merely affirmative action efforts with a different name. … These initiatives evolved to emphasize the importance of valuing differences and the importance of including all employees in the workforce, namely workplace diversity. While encompassing the principles of EEO and affirmative action, diversity has a much broader reach.

 Corporate diversity initiatives address a wide variety of issues that affect the workplace and the marketplace.

I invite you to take a moment to read my latest article, Affirmative Action and Diversity: Myths and Facts and to share it with your colleagues.