Racial quotas in employment and education are numerical requirements for hiring, promoting, admitting and/or graduating members of a particular racial group while discriminating against other racial groups. Racial quotas are often established after a political system gives legitimacy to the pressures produced by the dynamics of identity politics. Racial quotas are closely linked to notions of group rights, and special rights.
These quotas may be determined by governmental authority and backed by governmental sanctions. When the total number of jobs or enrollment slots is fixed, this proportion may get translated to a specific number. In education, this kind of quota is also known as Numerus clausus.
Racial quotas are highly contentious because they represent a deviation from the principle of equality before the law for all citizens. Quotas of any form also challenge commonly held values in liberal democratic societies of championing meritocracy above the apportioning of resources based upon an individual's identity.
Contents |
History
Racial quotas in the United States began to be implemented with government approval after the Civil Rights Act of 1964, especially during the 1970s.[1] Richard Nixon's Labor Secretary George P. Schultz demanded that anti-black construction unions allow a certain number of black people into the unions.[1] The Department of Labor began enforcing these quotas across the country.[2] After a Supreme Court case, Griggs v. Duke Power Company, found that neutral application tests and procedures that still resulted in de facto segregation of employees (if previous discrimination had existed) were illegal, more companies began implementing quotas on their own.[2]
In a 1973 court case, a federal judge created one of the first mandated quotas when he ruled that half of the Bridgeport, Connecticut Police Department's new employees must be either black or Puerto Rican.[2] In 1974, the Department of Justice and the United Steelworkers of America came to an agreement on the largest-to-then quota program, for steel unions.[2]
In 1978, the Supreme Court ruled in Bakke v. Regents that public universities (and other government institutions) could not set specific numerical targets based on race for admissions or employment.[1] The Court said that "goals" and "timetables" for diversity could be set instead.[2] A 1989 Supreme Court case, Weber v. United Steelworkers, found that private employers could set rigid numerical quotas, if they chose to do so.[1] In 1990, the Supreme Court found that a 10% racial quota for federal contractors was permitted.[2]
Opposition
Opponents of quotas object that one group is favored at the expense of another whenever a quota is invoked (i.e., 8 out of 10 available positions) rather than factors such as grade point averages or test scores. They argue that using quotas displaces individuals from another group that would normally be favored based on factors of the individual's achievements. Another significant problem with racial quotas is the controversial process of reevaluating quota percentages after changes of racial ratios in a society, especially when a racial minority becomes a majority.
David Frum believes that the Bakke Supreme Court case created an incentive for universities to create quotas, but pretend that they are not quotas.[2]
Alternatives
Advocates of affirmative action programs often deny that these programs involve quotas, although some openly do, such as the admission program of the Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul.[3] Advocates may regard the term "racial quotas" as particularly divisive in that it is assumed to be backed by the force of law to enable or disable certain linked programs or benefits based solely upon attainment of the one quota measure.
The law student organization Building a Better Legal Profession has developed a method to encourage politically liberal students to avoid law firms whose racial makeup is markedly different than that of the population as a whole. In an October 2007 press conference reported in The Wall Street Journal,[4] and the New York Times [5] the group released data publicizing the numbers of African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asian-Americans at America's top law firms. The group has sent information to top law schools around the country, encouraging students who agree with this viewpoint to take the demographic data into account when choosing where to work after graduation.[6] As more students choose where to work based on the firms' diversity rankings, firms face an increasing market pressure in order to attract top recruits.[7]
See also
- Equality of opportunity vs Equality of outcome
- Racism, Anti-racism
- Reverse discrimination, Discrimination
Examples:
- Affirmative Action
- Diversity (business)
- Jewish quota
- Numerus clausus
- Regents of the University of California v. Bakke
- Reservation in India
Related:
References
- ^ a b c d Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '60s. New York, New York: Basic Books. pp. 242-244. ISBN 0465041957.
- ^ a b c d e f g Frum, David (2000). How We Got Here: The '70s. New York, New York: Basic Books. pp. 242-244. ISBN 0465041957.
- ^ Jeter, Jon (June 16, 2003). "Affirmative Action Debate Forces Brazil to Take Look in the Mirror". The Washington Post. http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A62685-2003Jun15?language=printer.
- ^ Amir Efrati, You Say You Want a Big-Law Revolution, Take II, "Wall Street Journal", October 10, 2007.
- ^ Adam Liptak, In Students’ Eyes, Look-Alike Lawyers Don’t Make the Grade, New York Times, October 29, 2007, http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/29/us/29bar.html?em&ex=1193889600&en=4b0cd84261ffe5b4&ei=5087%0A
- ^ Henry Weinstein, Big L.A. law firms score low on diversity survey: The numbers of female, black, Latino, Asian and gay partners and associates lag significantly behind their representation in the city's population, according to a study, "Los Angeles Times", October 11, 2007, http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-diversity11oct11,1,661263.story?coll=la-headlines-california
- ^ Thomas Adcock and Zusha Elinson, Student Group Grades Firms On Diversity, Pro Bono Work, "New York Law Journal," October 19, 2007, http://www.law.com/jsp/nylj/PubArticleNY.jsp?hubtype=BackPage&id=1192698212305
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
