Why Affirmative Action Is Wrong

I still do not understand how the human race fell so dark that people believed that slavery was ever a good thing. People use the Bible as a tool to justify slavery, and some believe that the wording from God was his validation that he was pleased. Slavery, employment at will, and affirmative action has always been a debate that linked to race, cultures, politics, social statuses, religions, and the constitution. We could not have a clear discussion about affirmative action without addressing slavery. Slavery is a topic, many refused to discuss, and a topic most are not educated on. We could also not have a clear discussion about injustice in the work environment without addressing employment at will. At some point of time, every race has endured
slavery, but most of this information is not taught in schools. As time passed, people felt it was time to do something about the injustice of people as a whole, but mainly for minorities and women. Most of the states are completely against the employment at will policy, therefore a company may have a hard time, trying to use that as a defense in court. According to Sentell and Robbins (2008), “This doctrine states that the business should have the freedom to discharge or retain employees at-will for good cause, for no cause, or even for bad cause, without thereby being guilty of an unlawful act. It is a right which an employee may exercise in the same way, to the same extent, for the same cause or want of cause as the employer” (p.1). Many are against this policy because it gives management the right to fire someone without proper justification. This policy does not always protect the rights of employees, and there could even be safety issues being overlooked, because management knows they are covered under this policy. Without this policy, management would need justification and a trail of paperwork showing that the employee was counseled for poor performances prior to firing them. There is also no stability or real protection for employees that work under this policy, and that could be very stressful. Above it is stated that there is no real protection for employees, but there are some employees that support the employment at will policy. The contract does not lock them into one job and it gives them the freedom to move from job to job as their experiences and skills evolve. In old times, employees started from the bottom and were promoted based on seniority, and it did not matter how much education that person had. Under this policy, employees are promoted on the quality of work and not some rule that states you have to work in the company for 5 years before moving to the next level. Another good thing about the policy is that it gives the employee the upper hand at the end of their contract. At that point, the employee can demand more money and this could completely slow down or stop the operations of a business. What management loves about this policy is that it is not covered under any union. Employees do not have the same rights as employees that fall under the union; therefore they can terminate the contracts of employees at any given time. The employment at will policy is one of the many reasons this country needed a policy like affirmative action. The employment at will policy was more about injustice in the work place, but there were also cases where this policy was used for Master & Slaves. For centuries, people have been dealing with injustice for many different reasons, and some are not always positive. Affirmative action was created for individuals who suffered injustice and missed opportunities relating to their education, as well as qualified jobs. The policies were established to make sure all were treated fairly and given the same opportunities. We cannot go back and undo all the wrongs and mistakes of the past, but people can make sure that the same mistakes are not repeating themselves. “In 1961, President John Kennedy issued executive order 10925, which created the Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity and mandated that federally funded projects take "affirmative action" to insure that hiring and employment practices were free of racial bias. In 1965, President Lyndon Johnson issued executive order 11246 establishing guidelines and documentation procedures for federal contractors, and in 1967, the order was amended to cover gender discrimination” (Government: 1960s-2000s, n.d.). Affirmative action was not the golden ticket to fix everything, but it was used to address discrimination and other human right violations. The policy was created to demand fairness, but over time, the policy itself appeared to discriminate against others. When we think about affirmative action, we need to focus on the values, standards, moral and ethical issues of others within organizations, companies, and schools, but also within our hearts. This is the very reason so many have fought so hard for affirmative action, and the very same reason so many are completely against it. The question we still need to address is how there were so many laws and policies against discrimination, but it still existed. After reviewing all of the case law examples in the textbook, it is clear how people can argue for or against the concepts of affirmative action.
The argument for affirmative action is pretty simple; people just want a fair chance at obtaining jobs they are qualified for and the chance of going to a school because of their academic abilities. Affirmative action programs were put in place to break down walls within schools, businesses, and organizations and implement opportunities for people that were normally over looked because of race and sexual discrimination. Historical affirmative action cases have proven that there was a huge separation between people because of race and sex. Statistics have also shown that ignoring the problem of discrimination only leads to bigger social problems. The affirmative action programs also wanted compensatory justice, and this is something else that people agreed with. People feel that they did not live their lives to the fullest extend because so many rights, and things were taken away from them and members of their families, so they wanted to be compensated for it. We have to be careful that we do not reverse discrimination to others because of their gender, nationality, or family status, while pushing the point of affirmative action. If a person has never been discriminated against, then it would be hard for them to really understand why affirmative action is so important. History cannot right the wrongs of the past, people just
need to do better and make sure history does not repeat itself. The argument against affirmative action comes from different aspects and perceptions. Affirmative action stands for equality, but when a college states your application was disapproved, because you are a 23-year-old, poor white male, then where is his justice? The percentages were established to make sure each race is represented, but a person does not understand that, when they are the one fighting for justice for themselves. Even with the military promotion system, there is a percentages requirement for blacks, women, and Hispanics. I remember seeing the list years ago around promotion time, but I do not believe they still openly published one. Every year people question the fairness of the promotion system, because these percentages still play a part of the promotion process. There is also one group of individuals that are against affirmative action, because they have loss their sense of entitlement. They feel that the act does not give them the rights they were once entitled to, whether it is at the work place, and/or schools. One of the case law examples gave an example of a reverse discrimination, because the business filled positions with blacks to meet quotas. Another example related to a woman’s “sex as a relevant factor when making promotion decisions for job” (Kubasek, N. K., Brennan, B. A., Browne, M. N., 2017). The need for equality for women and minorities were needed, but at the same time, I can clearly understand why people think affirmative action violates the very thing it stands for, which is equality.
One of the case law examples stated that an “Hispanic firm submitting a higher bid, and in accordance with a government program gives 5 percent of all highway construction projects to disadvantaged firms” Kubasek, N. K., Brennan, B. A., Browne, M. N., 2017). So others fighting for the same contract bid, could raise the flag and claim injustice on behalf of their companies. We do not need any new laws in place; we just need to enforce the ones we already
have. In conclusion, this country has come a long way, but there are still a lot of things we need to do. Over the last nine years we have been divided as a country and a lot of it has to do with people’s morals, standards, and political views. Over the last century there were a lot of laws, and policies created to protect the rights of all; however as a country we still deal with the injustice of people everyday. There is a very thin line between the country’s economic situation and people’s political beliefs. With policies like the employment at will, and affirmative action, statistics show we are moving in the right direction