What's the Future for Affirmative Action in the Workplace?
If race-based discrimination is unconstitutional for college
admissions, how can we continue to allow it in the workplace?
Douglas Andrews
*Now that race-based discrimination has been rightly ruled un-
constitutional in college admissions, what are the odds that such
discrimination will continue to be allowed in the American work-
place?
*Put another way: Is it time to red-line racial discrimination
right out of the office?
It's a great question, and it's now top-of-mind among corporate
lawyers — the folks whose job it is to keep their companies from
getting sued for mega-millions. All of a sudden, "diversity" might
not be a good enough defense for looking at certain people's skin
color and deeming them less desirable in the workplace.
As Fox Business reports: "Federal law prohibits the considera-
tion of race and other protected characteristics like age, religion,
sex — including sexual orientation, gender identity, or pregnancy —
national origin, disability or genetic information in corporate
hiring decisions."
And yet, as Fox Business mealy-mouths it: "Many corporations
have sought to diversify their workforce by trying to recruit qua-
lified candidates from more diverse pools of applicants or through
training programs that offer opportunities to members of groups that
a company believes are underrepresented in their management teams.
Such initiatives are often part of a company's broader diversity,
equity and inclusion (DEI) program."
Here's a tip: Think of "diversity" and "DEI" as euphemisms for
"discrimination." Because that's what they are.
One can imagine both the rage and the despair currently being
felt among the activists in the New York Times's newsroom. Not only
is their president an international embarrassment and a source of
near-constant ridicule, but the policies they've championed and used
to divide Americans for more than a half-century are now, finally,
being rejected as unconstitutional and repudiated by the American
people.
And now, in the wake of last week's landmark Supreme Court dec-
ision striking down race-based discrimination in college admissions,
the writing may be on the wall for the corporate diversicrats, those
racial bean-counters who've made it their mission to ensure proper
numerical representation of the races everywhere except in the NFL
and the NBA and the hip-hop industry.
"The effects on business could be profound," the Times reports.
"Corporate America has embraced diversity, equity and inclusion
policies, particularly in the wake of protests over George Floyd's
killing in 2020. But Thursday's ruling opens the door for employees
— and conservative activists — to bring legal challenges to those
policies." (Is it just us, or does anyone else find it weird that
the Times is conflating the death of George Floyd with race-based
discrimination in the workplace?)
*Newly released reports have now shown that Floyd did NOT die
from his neck being pressured but from a drug overdose.*
Desperate to find a racially discriminatory silver lining in
the dark cloud of color-blindness, the Times trots out the experts:
"Corporate diversity efforts aren't exactly analogous to university
ones, some experts say. The equal protection clause doesn't apply
to private employers, Doug Brayley, a labor law specialist at Ropes
& Gray, told DealBook."
It's an interesting argument to make — and it betrays the weak-
ness of the diversitymongers' hand — when they're reduced to arguing
that the Constitution doesn't prohibit racial discrimination in the
private sector.
DEI though, is big business — really big business. As columnist
Charles Gasparino writes, "It's the acronym for the nearly $10 bil-
lion Diversity, Equity and Inclusion industry."
As to the argument that the Supreme Court didn't rule on DEI
when it struck down racial preferences in college admissions, Gaspa-
rino begs to differ: "Sorry," he says, "my sources who advise cor-
porations on governance issues say the Supremes actually did rule on
DEI since corporate DEI is based on some of the same noxious and now
unconstitutional premises that colleges have used to justify race-
based admissions."
(Affirmative action was a product of the percentage of members
of different races being equally employed but it didn't stop there.
This was similar to Equal Opportunity Employment but it too
was inflated by the Left to have "Equal" take on a new meaning ig-
noring the facts. Facts like only 13% of Americans are African-Amer-
icans, 20% are Hispanic, but 59% are considered White so it is easy
to try to blame whites for holding a majority of jobs.
The deciding factor should be qualifications, ability, and the
knowledge possessed regardless of creed or color because the first
concen of an employer should always be hiring someone who can do
the job without spending a fortune on training.)
Let's see if corporate America agrees. And if not, let the
lawsuits begin.**
According to the Constitution, "All men were created equal".
That simply means that people should strive to prepare themselves
for whatever they aspire to accomplish.
Blaming others for your failures is on you and it is not the
responsibility of others to provide for you unless you physically
are incapable.
God tells us he will protect and provide but we have to ask
for His Grace, Help, and follow His commandments.
Conservatively,
John
Conservativelyjohn.com 