text:
Affirmative action
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Part of a series on
Discrimination
General forms[show]
Age
Caste
Class
Color
Disability
Genotype
Hair texture
Height
Language
Looks
Mental condition
Race / Ethnicity / Nationality
Rank / Authority
Religion
Sex
Sexual orientation
Size
Species
Specific forms
Social[show]
AIDS stigma
Adultism
Anti-albinism
Anti-autism
Anti-homelessness
Anti-intellectualism
Anti-intersex
Anti-left handedness
Anti-Masonry
Jews
Audism
Binarism
Biphobia
Cronyism
Drug use
Elitism
Ephebiphobia
Ethnopluralism
Body weight
Genderism
Anti-Elder
Heteronormativity
Heterosexism
Homophobia
Islamophobia
Leprosy stigma
Lesbophobia
Mentalism
Misandry
Misogyny
Nepotism
Pedophobia
Pregnancy
Reverse
Sectarianism
Shadism
Supremacism
Black
White
Transmisogyny
Transphobia
Vegaphobia
Xenophobia
Manifestations[show]
Animal cruelty
Animal testing
Blood libel
Blood sport
Carnism
Compulsory sterilization
Counter-jihad
Cultural genocide
Democide
Disability hate crime
Educational
Economic
Eliminationism
Employment
Enemy of the people
Ethnic cleansing
Ethnic hatred
Ethnic joke
Ethnocide
Forced conversion
Freak show
Gay bashing
Gendercide
Genital mutilation
Genocide
examples
Glass ceiling
Group libel
Hate crime
Hate group
Hate speech
Homeless dumping
Housing
Indian rolling
LGBT hate crime
Lavender scare
Lynching
Meat eating
Mortgage
Murder music
Occupational segregation
Persecution
Pogrom
Purge
Race war
Red Scare
Religious persecution
Scapegoating
Segregation academy
Sex-selective abortion
Slavery
Slut-shaming
Trans bashing
Victimisation
Misogynistically–motivated violence
White flight
White power music
Wife selling
Witch-hunt
Policies[show]
Segregation
age
racial
religious
sexual
Age of candidacy
Blood purity
Blood quantum
Crime of apartheid
Disabilities
Jewish
Catholic
Ethnocracy
Gender pay gap
Gender roles
Gerontocracy
Gerrymandering
Ghetto benches
Internment
Jewish quota
Jim Crow
Law for Protection of the Nation
McCarthyism
Gay blood donor controversy
Nonpersons
Numerus clausus (as religious or racial quota)
Nuremberg Laws
One-drop rule
Racial quota
Racial steering
Racist real-estate
Same-sex marriage (laws and issues prohibiting)
Sodomy law
Ugly law
Voter suppression
Countermeasures[show]
Affirmative action
Animal rights
Anti-discrimination law
Cultural assimilation
Cultural pluralism
Desegregation
Diversity training
Empowerment
Feminism
Fighting Discrimination
Human rights
Intersex rights
Masculism
Multiculturalism
Nonviolence
Racial integration
Self-determination
Social integration
Toleration
Vegetarianism
Veganism
Related topics[show]
Allophilia
Anthropocentrism
Anti-cultural sentiment
Assimilation
Bias
Christian privilege
Data discrimination
Dehumanization
Diversity
Ethnic penalty
Eugenics
Intersectionality
Male privilege
Masculism
Multiculturalism
Neurodiversity
Oikophobia
Oppression
Police brutality
Political correctness
Polyculturalism
Power distance
Prejudice
Racial bias in criminal news
Racism by country
Regressive left
Religious intolerance
Second-generation gender bias
Snobbery
Social exclusion
Stigma
Stereotype
threat
White privilege
Discrimination portal
v
t
e
Affirmative action, also known as reservation in India and Nepal, positive action in the UK, and employment equity (in a narrower context) in Canada and South Africa, is the policy of promoting the education and employment of members of groups that are known to have previously suffered from discrimination.[1][2][3][4] Historically and internationally, support for affirmative action has sought to achieve goals such as bridging inequalities in employment and pay, increasing access to education, promoting diversity, and redressing apparent past wrongs, harms, or hindrances.
The nature of affirmative action policies varies from region to region. Some countries use a quota system, whereby a certain percentage of government jobs, political positions, and school vacancies must be reserved for members of a certain group; an example of this is the reservation system in India. In some other regions where quotas are not used, minority group members are given preference or special consideration in selection processes. In the United States, affirmative action in employment and education has been the subject of legal and political controversy, and in 2003, a pair of US Supreme Court decisions (Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger) permitted educational institutions to consider race as a factor when admitting students while prohibiting the use of quotas.[5] In other countries, such as the UK,[6][7][8] affirmative action is rendered illegal because it does not treat all races equally. This approach to equal treatment is described as being "color blind." In such countries, the focus tends to be on ensuring equal opportunity and, for example, targeted advertising campaigns to encourage ethnic minority candidates to join the police force. This is sometimes described as "positive action."
Contents
1 Origins
2 Women
3 Quotas
4 National approaches
4.1 Africa
4.1.1 South Africa
4.1.1.1 Apartheid
4.1.1.2 Post-apartheid – the Employment Equity Act
4.1.1.3 Affirmative Action Purpose
4.1.1.4 Outcomes
4.2 Asia
4.2.1 China
4.2.2 Israel
4.2.3 India
4.2.4 Malaysia
4.2.5 Sri Lanka
4.2.6 Taiwan
4.3 Europe
4.3.1 Finland
4.3.2 France
4.3.3 Germany
4.3.4 Norway
4.3.5 Romania
4.3.6 Russia
4.3.7 Slovakia
4.3.8 United Kingdom
4.4 North America
4.4.1 Canada
4.4.2 United States
4.5 Oceania
4.5.1 New Zealand
4.6 South America
4.6.1 Brazil
5 International organizations
5.1 United Nations
6 Support
6.1 Polls
7 Criticism
7.1 Mismatching
8 See also
9 Notes
10 References
11 Further reading
12 External links
Origins[edit]
The term "affirmative action" was first used in the United States in "Executive Order No. 10925",[9] signed by President John F. Kennedy on 6 March 1961, which included a provision that government contractors "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin."[10] It was used to promote actions that achieve non-discrimination. In 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson issued Executive Order 11246 which required government employers to take "affirmative action" to "hire without regard to race, religion and national origin". This prevented employers from discriminating against members of disadvantaged groups. In 1967, gender was added to the anti-discrimination list.[11]
Affirmative action is intended to promote the opportunities of defined minority groups within a society to give them equal access to that of the majority population.[12]
It is often instituted for government and educational settings to ensure that certain designated "minority groups" within a society are able to participate in all provided opportunities including promotional, educational, and training opportunities.[13]
The stated justification for affirmative action by its proponents is that it helps to compensate for past discrimination, persecution or exploitation by the ruling class of a culture,[14] and to address existing discrimination.[15]
Women[edit]
See also: Women in government (quotas)
Several different studies investigated the effect of affirmative action on women. Kurtulus (2012) in her review of affirmative action and the occupational advancement of minorities and women during 1973-2003 showed that the effect of affirmative action on advancing black, Hispanic, and white women into management, professional, and technical occupations occurred primarily during the 1970s and early 1980s. During this period, contractors grew their shares of these groups more rapidly than noncontractors because of the implementation of affirmative action. But the positive effect of affirmative action vanished entirely in the late 1980s, which Kurtulus says may be due to the slowdown into advanced occupation for women and minorities because of the political shift of affirmative action that started by President Reagan. Becoming a federal contractor increased white women's share of professional occupations by 0.183 percentage points, or 7.3 percent, on average during these three decades, and increased black women's share by 0.052 percentage points (or by 3.9 percent). Becoming a federal contractor also increased Hispanic women's and black men's share of technical occupations on average by 0.058 percent and 0.109 percentage points respectively (or by 7.7 and 4.2 percent). These represent a substantial contribution of affirmative action to overall trends in the occupational advancement of women and minorities over the three decades under the study.[16] A reanalysis of multiple scholarly studies, especially in Asia, considered the impact of four primary factors on support for affirmative action programs for women: gender; political factors; psychological factors; and social structure. Kim and Kim (2014) found that, "Affirmative action both corrects existing unfair treatment and gives women equal opportunity in the future."[17]
Quotas[edit]
Law regarding quotas and affirmative action varies widely from nation to nation. Caste-based quotas are used in India for reservation. However, they are illegal in the United States, where no employer, university, or other entity may create a set number required for each race.
In 2012, the European Union Commission approved a plan for women to constitute 40% of non-executive board directorships in large listed companies in Europe by 2020.[18] In Sweden, the Supreme Court has ruled that "affirmative action" ethnic quotas in universities are discrimination and hence unlawful. It said that the requirements for the intake should be the same for all. The justice minister said that the decision left no room for uncertainty.[19]
National approaches[edit]
See also: Reserved political positions
In some countries that have laws on racial equality, affirmative action is rendered illegal because it does not treat all races equally. This approach of equal treatment is sometimes described as being "color blind", in hopes that it is effective against discrimination without engaging in reverse discrimination.
In such countries, the focus tends to be on ensuring equal opportunity and, for example, targeted advertising campaigns to encourage ethnic minority candidates to join the police force. This is sometimes described as "positive action."
Africa[edit]
South Africa[edit]
See also: Black Economic Empowerment
Apartheid[edit]
The apartheid government, as a matter of state policy, favoured white-owned, especially Afrikaner-owned companies. The aforementioned policies achieved the desired results, but in the process they marginalised and excluded black people. Skilled jobs were also reserved for white people, and blacks were largely used as unskilled labour, enforced by legislation including the Mines and Works Act, the Job Reservations Act, the Native Building Workers Act, the Apprenticeship Act and the Bantu Education Act,[20] creating and extending the "colour bar" in South African labour.[21] Then the whites successfully persuaded the government to enact laws that highly restricted the blacks' employment opportunities.
Since the 1960s the apartheid laws had been weakened. Consequently, from 1975 to 1990 the real wages of black manufacturing workers rose by 50%, while those of whites rose by 1%.[22]
The economic and politically structured society during the apartheid ultimately caused disparities in employment, occupation and income within labour markets, which provided advantages to certain groups and characteristics of people. This in due course was the motivation to introduce affirmative action in South Africa, following the end of apartheid.[23]
Post-apartheid – the Employment Equity Act[edit]
Following the transition to democracy in 1994, the African National Congress-led government chose to implement affirmative action legislation to correct previous imbalances (a policy known as employment equity). As such, all employers were compelled by law to employ previously disenfranchised groups (blacks, Indians, and Coloureds). A related, but distinct concept is Black Economic Empowerment.[24]
The Employment Equity Act and the Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment Act aim to promote and achieve equality in the workplace (in South Africa termed "equity"), by advancing people from designated groups. The designated groups who are to be advanced include all people of colour, women (including white women) and people with disabilities (including white people). Employment Equity legislation requires companies employing more than 50 people to design and implement plans to improve the representativity of workforce demographics, and report them to the Department of Labour.[25]
Employment Equity also forms part of a company's Black Economic Empowerment scorecard: in a relatively complex scoring system, which allows for some flexibility in the manner in which each company meets its legal commitments, each company is required to meet minimum requirements in terms of representation by previously disadvantaged groups. The matters covered include equity ownership, representation at employee and management level (up to board of director level), procurement from black-owned businesses and social investment programs, amongst others.
The policies of Employment Equity and, particularly, Black Economic empowerment have been criticised both by those who view them as discriminatory against white people, and by those who view them as ineffectual.[26][27][28][29][30]
These laws cause disproportionally high costs for small companies and reduce economic growth and employment.[22] The laws may give the black middle-class some advantage but can make the worse-off blacks even poorer.[22] Moreover, the Supreme Court has ruled that in principle blacks may be favored, but in practice this should not lead to unfair discrimination against the others.[22][22]
Affirmative Action Purpose[edit]
As mentioned previously affirmative action was introduced through the Employment Equality Act, 55 in 1998, 4 years after the end of apartheid. This act was passed to promote the constitutional right of equality and exercise true democracy. This idea was to eliminate unfair discrimination in employment, to ensure the implementation of employment equity to redress the effects of discrimination, to achieve a diverse workforce broadly representative of our people, to promote economic development and efficiency in the workforce and to give effects to the obligations of the Republic as a member of the International Labour Organisation.[23][31]
Many embraced the Act; however some concluded that the act contradicted itself. The act eliminates unfair discrimination in certain sectors of the national labour market by imposing similar constraints on another.[23]
With the introduction of Affirmative Action, Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) rose additionally in South Africa. The BEE was not a moral initiative to redress the wrongs of the past but to promote growth and strategies that aim to realize a country's full potential. The idea was targeting the weakest link in economics, which was inequality and which would help develop the economy. This is evident in the statement by the Department of Trade and Industry, "As such, this strategy stresses a BEE process that is associated with growth, development and enterprise development, and not merely the redistribution of existing wealth".[32][33] Similarities between the BEE and affirmative action are apparent; however there is a difference. BEE focuses more on employment equality rather than taking wealth away from the skilled white labourers.[32]
The main goal of Affirmative Action is for a country to reach its full potential. This occurrence would result in a completely diverse workforce in economic and social sectors. Thus broadening the economic base and therefore stimulating economic growth.[34]
Outcomes[edit]
This section is written in the style of a debate rather than an encyclopedic summary. It may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards and make it more accessible to a general audience. Please discuss this issue on the talk page. (May 2018) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
Once applied within the country, many different outcomes arose, some positive and some negative. This depended on the approach to and the view of The Employment Equality Act and affirmative action.
Positive: Pre-Democracy, the apartheid governments discriminated against non-white races, so with affirmative action, the country started to redress past discriminations. Affirmative action also focused on combating structural racism and racial inequality, hoping to maximize diversity in all levels of society and sectors.[35] Achieving this would elevate the status of the perpetual underclass and to restore equal access to the benefits of society.[23]
Negative: Though affirmative action had its positives, negatives arose. A quota system was implemented, which aimed to achieve targets of diversity in a work force. This target affected the hiring and level of skill in the work force, ultimately affecting the free market.[34][35] Affirmative action created marginalization for coloured and Indian races in South Africa, as well as developing and aiding the middle and elite classes, leaving the lower class behind. This created a bigger gap between the lower and middle class, which led to class struggles and a greater segregation.[31][35] Entitlement began to arise with the growth of the middle and elite classes, as well as race entitlement. Many believe that affirmative action is discrimination in reverse. With all these negatives, much talent started to leave the country.[23] Many negative consequences of affirmative action, specifically the quota system, drive skilled labour away, resulting in bad economic growth. This is due to very few international companies wanting to invest in South Africa.[35]
With these negative and positive outcomes of affirmative action, it is evident that the concept of affirmative action is continually evolving.[35]
Asia[edit]
China[edit]
Main article: Affirmative action in China
There is affirmative action in education for minority nationalities. This may equate to lowering minimum requirements for the National University Entrance Examination, which is a mandatory exam for all students to enter university.[36][37] Some universities set quotas for minority (non-Han) student intake.[38] Further, minority students enrolled in ethnic minority-oriented specialties (e.g. language and literature programs) are provided with scholarships and/or pay no tuition, and are granted a monthly stipend.
Israel[edit]
A class-based affirmative action policy was incorporated into the admission practices of the four most selective universities in Israel during the early to mid-2000s. In evaluating the eligibility of applicants, neither their financial status nor their national or ethnic origins are considered. The emphasis, rather, is on structural disadvantages, especially neighborhood socioeconomic status and high school rigor, although several individual hardships are also weighed. This policy made the four institutions, especially the echelons at the most selective departments, more diverse than they otherwise would have been. The rise in geographic, economic and demographic diversity of a student population suggests that the plan's focus on structural determinants of disadvantage yields broad diversity dividends.[39]
Israeli citizens who are; Women, Arabs, Blacks or people with disabilities are entitled to Affirmative Action in the civil service employment.[40] Also Israeli citizens who are Arabs, Blacks or people with disabilities are entitled for Affirmative Actions are entitled for full University tuition scholarships by the state.[41]
In her study of gender politics in Israel, Dafna Izraeli showed that the paradox of affirmative action for women directors is that the legitimation for legislating their inclusion on boards also resulted in the exclusion of women's interested as a legitimate issue on the boards' agendas. "The new culture of the men's club is seductive token women are under the pressure to become "social males" and prove that their competence as directors, meaning that they are not significantly different from men. In the negotiation for status as worthy peers, emphasizing gender signals that a woman is an "imposter", someone who does not rightfully belong in the position she is claiming to fill." And once affirmative action for women is fulfilled, and then affirmative action shares the element, as Izraeli put it, the "group equality discourse," making it easier for other groups to claim for a fairer distribution of resources. This suggests that affirmative action can have applications for different groups in Israel.[42]
India[edit]
Main article: Reservation in India
Reservation in India is a form of affirmative action designed to improve the well-being of backward and under-represented communities defined primarily by their caste. Reservation in India favors the majority of the population with more than 70% of Indian Citizens eligible for reservation benefits. [43] 49.5% of all college admissions and government jobs are reserved for this 70% majority but they can also compete for the remaining 50.5% unreserved quota as well [44]. Further, only 0.7% of scholarships disbursed by the government were given on the basis of merit, with over 94% of the scholarships given on basis of Reservation instead [45].
Malaysia[edit]
Main article: Ketuanan Melayu
The Malaysian New Economic Policy or NEP serves as a form of affirmative action. Malaysia provides affirmative action to the majority because in general, the Malays have lower incomes than the Chinese, who have traditionally been involved in businesses and industries, but who were also general migrant workers.[46] Malaysia is a multi-ethnic country, with Malays making up the majority of close to 52% of the population. About 23% of the population is of Chinese descent, while those of Indian descent comprise about 7% of the population.
(See also Bumiputra) The mean income for Malays, Chinese and Indians in 1957/58 were 134, 288 and 228 respectively. In 1967/68 it was 154, 329 and 245, and in 1970 it was 170, 390 and 300. Mean income disparity ratio for Chinese/Malays rose from 2.1 in 1957/58 to 2.3 in 1970, whereas for Indians/Malays the disparity ratio also rose from 1.7 to 1.8 in the same period.[47] The Malays viewed Independence as restoring their proper place in their own country's socioeconomic order while the non-Malays were opposing government efforts to advance Malay political primacy and economic welfare.
Sri Lanka[edit]
In 1981 the Standardization policy of Sri Lankan universities was introduced as an affirmative action program for students from areas which had lower rates of education than other areas due to missionary activity in the north and east, which essentially were the Tamil areas. Successive governments cultivated a historical myth after the colonial powers had left that the British had practised communal favouritism towards Christians and the minority Tamil community for the entire 200 years they had controlled Sri Lanka. However, the Sinhalese in fact benefitted from trade and plantation cultivations over the rest of the other groups and their language and culture as well as the religion of Buddhism was fostered and made into mediums for schools over the Tamil language, which did not have the same treatment and Tamils learned English instead as there was no medium for Tamil until near independence. Tamils' knowledge of English and education came from the very American missionary activity by overseas Christians that the British were concerned will anger the Sinhalese and destroy their trading relationships, so they sent them to the Tamil areas instead to teach, thinking it would have no consequences and due to their small numbers. The British sending the missionaries to the north and east was for the protection of the Sinhalese and in fact showed favouritism to the majority group instead of the minorities to maintain trading relationships and benefits from them. The Tamils, out of this random benefit from learning English and basic education excelled and flourished and were able to take many civil service jobs to the chagrin of the Sinhalese. The myth of Divide and Rule is untrue. The 'policy of standardisation' was typical of affirmative action policies, in that it required drastically lower standards for Sinhalese students than for the more academic Tamils who had to get about ten more marks to enter into universities. The policy, were it not implemented would have prevented the civil wars ahead as the policies had no basis and in fact is an example of discrimination against the Tamil ethnic group.[48]
Taiwan[edit]
A 2004 legislation requires that, for a firm with 100 employees or more wishing to compete for government contracts, at least 1 per cent of its employees must be Taiwanese aborigines.[49] Ministry of Education and Council of Aboriginal Affairs announced in 2002 that Taiwanese Aboriginal students would have their high-school or undergraduate entrance exams boosted by 33% for demonstrating some knowledge of their tribal language and culture.[50] The percentage of boost have been revised several times, and the latest percentage is 35% in 2013.[51]
Europe[edit]
Finland[edit]
In certain university education programs, including legal and medical education, there are quotas for persons who reach a certain standard of skills in the Swedish language; for students admitted in these quotas, the education is partially arranged in Swedish.[52][53] The purpose of the quotas is to guarantee that a sufficient number of professionals with skills in Swedish are educated for nationwide needs.[52] The quota system has met with criticism from the Finnish speaking majority, some of whom consider the system unfair. In addition to these linguistic quotas, women may get preferential treatment in recruitment for certain public sector jobs if there is a gender imbalance in the field.
France[edit]
No distinctions based on race, religion or sex are allowed under the 1958 French Constitution.[54] Since the 1980s, a French version of affirmative action based on neighborhood is in place for primary and secondary education. Some schools, in neighborhoods labeled "Priority Education Zones", are granted more funds than the others. Students from these schools also benefit from special policies in certain institutions (such as Sciences Po).[55]
The French Ministry of Defence tried in 1990 to make it easier for young French soldiers of North-African descent to be promoted in rank and obtain driving licenses. After a strong protest by a young French lieutenant[56] in the Ministry of Defence newspaper (Armées d'aujourd'hui), the driving license and rank plan was cancelled. After the Sarkozy election, a new attempt in favour of Arab-French students was made, but Sarkozy did not gain enough political support to change the French constitution. However, some French schools do implement affirmative action in that they are obligated to take a certain number of students from impoverished families.[57]
Additionally, following the Norwegian example, after 27 January 2014, women must represent at least 20% of board members in all stock exchange listed or state owned companies. After 27 January 2017, the proportion will increase to 40%. All appointments of males as directors will be invalid as long as the quota is not met, and monetary penalties may apply for other directors.[58]
Germany[edit]
Article 3 of the German Basic Law provides for equal rights of all people regardless of sex, race or social background. There are programs stating that if men and women have equal qualifications, women have to be preferred for a job; moreover, the disabled should be preferred to non-disabled people. This is typical for all positions in state and university service as of 2007[update], typically using the phrase "We try to increase diversity in this line of work". In recent years, there has been a long public debate about whether to issue programs that would grant women a privileged access to jobs in order to fight discrimination. Germany's Left Party brought up the discussion about affirmative action in Germany's school system. According to Stefan Zillich, quotas should be "a possibility" to help working class children who did not do well in school gain access to a Gymnasium (University-preparatory school).[59] Headmasters of Gymnasien have objected, saying that this type of policy would "be a disservice" to poor children.[60]
Norway[edit]
In all public stock companies (ASA) boards, either gender should be represented by at least 40%.[61] This affects roughly 400 companies of over 300,000 in total.[62]
Seierstad & Opsahl in their study of the effects of affirmative action on presence, prominence, and social capital of women directors in Norway found that there are few boards chaired by a woman, from the beginning of the implementation of affirmative action policy period to August 2009, the proportion of boards led by a woman has increased from 3.4% to 4.3%. This suggests that the law has had a marginal effect on the sex of the chair and the boards remain internally segregated. Although at the beginning of our observation period, only 7 of 91 prominent directors were women. The gender balance among prominent directors has changed considerable through the period, and at the end of the period, 107 women and 117 men were prominent directors. By applying more restrictive definitions of prominence, the proportion of directors who are women generally increases. If only considering directors with at least three directorships, 61.4% of them are women. When considering directors with seven or more directorships, all of them are women. Thus, affirmative action increase the female population in the director position.[63]
A 2016 study found no effect of the ASA representation requirement on either valuation or profits of the affected companies, and also no correlation between the requirement and the restructuring of companies away from ASA.[64] [65]
Romania[edit]
Romani people are allocated quotas for access to public schools and state universities.[66]
Russia[edit]
Quota systems existed in the USSR for various social groups including ethnic minorities (as a compensation of their "cultural backwardness"), women and factory workers.
Quotas for access to university education, offices in the Soviet system and the Communist Party existed: for example, the position of First Secretary of a Soviet Republic's (or Autonomous Republic's) Party Committee was always filled by a representative of this republic's "titular ethnicity".
Modern Russia retains this system partially. Quotas are abolished, however, preferences for some ethnic minorities and inhabitants of certain territories[67] remain.
Slovakia[edit]
The Constitutional Court declared in October 2005 that affirmative action i.e. "providing advantages for people of an ethnic or racial minority group" as being against its Constitution.[68]
United Kingdom[edit]
In the UK, any discrimination, quotas or favouritism due to sex, race and ethnicity among other "protected characteristics" is generally illegal for any reason in education, employment, during commercial transactions, in a private club or association, and while using public services.[6][7][8] The Equality Act 2010 established the principles of equality and their implementation in the UK.[69]
Specific exemptions include:
Part of the Northern Ireland Peace Process, the Good Friday Agreement and the resulting Patten report required the Police Service of Northern Ireland to recruit 50% of numbers from the Catholic community and 50% from the Protestant and other communities, in order to reduce any possible bias towards Protestants. This was later referred to as the '50:50' measure.[70] (See also Independent Commission on Policing for Northern Ireland.)
The Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002 allowed the use of all-women shortlists to select more women as election candidates.[71]
North America[edit]
Canada[edit]
Further information: Employment equity (Canada) and Federal Contractors' Program
The equality section of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms explicitly permits affirmative action type legislation, although the Charter does not require legislation that gives preferential treatment. Subsection 2 of Section 15 states that the equality provisions do "not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability."
The Canadian Employment Equity Act requires employers in federally-regulated industries to give preferential treatment to four designated groups: Women, persons with disabilities, aboriginal peoples, and visible minorities. Less than one-third of Canadian Universities offer alternative admission requirements for students of aboriginal descent. Some provinces and territories also have affirmative action-type policies. For example, in Northwest Territories in the Canadian north, aboriginal people are given preference for jobs and education and are considered to have P1 status. Non-aboriginal people who were born in the NWT or have resided half of their life there are considered a P2, as well as women and people with disabilities.[72]
United States[edit]
Main article: Affirmative action in the United States
The concept of affirmative action was introduced in the early 1960s in the United States, as a way to combat racial discrimination in the hiring process, with the concept later expanded to address gender discrimination.[11] Affirmative action was first created from Executive Order 10925, which was signed by President John F. Kennedy on 6 March 1961 and required that government employers "not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, creed, color, or national origin" and "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin".[73][74]
On 24 September 1965, President Lyndon B. Johnson signed Executive Order 11246, thereby replacing Executive Order 10925 and affirming Federal Government's commitment "to promote the full realization of equal employment opportunity through a positive, continuing program in each executive department and agency".[3] Affirmative action was extended to women by Executive Order 11375 which amended Executive Order 11246 on 13 October 1967, by adding "sex" to the list of protected categories. In the U.S. affirmative action's original purpose was to pressure institutions into compliance with the nondiscrimination mandate of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.[15][75] The Civil Rights Acts do not cover veterans, people with disabilities, or people over 40. These groups are protected from discrimination under different laws.[76]
Affirmative action has been the subject of numerous court cases,[77] and has been questioned upon its constitutional legitimacy. In 2003, a Supreme Court decision regarding affirmative action in higher education (Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 US 244 – Supreme Court 2003) permitted educational institutions to consider race as a factor when admitting students.[5] Alternatively, some colleges use financial criteria to attract racial groups that have typically been under-represented and typically have lower living conditions. Some states such as California (California Civil Rights Initiative), Michigan (Michigan Civil Rights Initiative), and Washington (Initiative 200) have passed constitutional amendments banning public institutions, including public schools, from practicing affirmative action within their respective states. Conservative activists have alleged that colleges quietly use illegal quotas to increase the number of minorities and have launched numerous lawsuits to stop them.[78]
Oceania[edit]
New Zealand[edit]
Individuals of Māori or other Polynesian descent are often afforded improved access to university courses, or have scholarships earmarked specifically for them.[6] Affirmative action is provided for under section 73 of the Human Rights Act 1993[79] and section 19(2) of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990.[80]
South America[edit]
Brazil[edit]
Further information: Vestibular exam § Racial quotas
Some Brazilian universities (state and federal) have created systems of preferred admissions (quotas) for racial minorities (blacks and Amerindians), the poor and people with disabilities. There are also quotas of up to 20% of vacancies reserved for people with disabilities in the civil public services.[81] The Democrats party, accusing the board of directors of the University of Brasília of "Nazism", appealed to the Supreme Federal Court against the constitutionality of the quotas the University reserves for minorities.[82] The Supreme Court unanimously approved their constitutionality on 26 April 2012.[83]
International organizations[edit]
United Nations[edit]
The International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination stipulates (in Article 2.2) that affirmative action programs may be required of countries that ratified the convention, in order to rectify systematic discrimination. It states, however, that such programs "shall in no case entail as a consequence the maintenance of unequal or separate rights for different racial groups after the objectives for which they were taken have been achieved."[84]
The United Nations Human Rights Committee states that "the principle of equality sometimes requires States parties to take affirmative action in order to diminish or eliminate conditions which cause or help to perpetuate discrimination prohibited by the Covenant. For example, in a State where the general conditions of a certain part of the population prevent or impair their enjoyment of human rights, the State should take specific action to correct those conditions. Such action may involve granting for a time to the part of the population concerned certain preferential treatment in specific matters as compared with the rest of the population. However, as long as such action is needed to correct discrimination, in fact, it is a case of legitimate differentiation under the Covenant."[84]
Support[edit]
The principle of affirmative action is to promote societal equality through the preferential treatment of socioeconomically disadvantaged people. Often, these people are disadvantaged for historical reasons, such as oppression or slavery.[85] Historically and internationally, support for affirmative action has sought to achieve a range of goals: bridging inequalities in employment and pay; increasing access to education; enriching state, institutional, and professional leadership with the full spectrum of society; redressing apparent past wrongs, harms, or hindrances, in particular addressing the apparent social imbalance left in the wake of slavery and slave laws.
A 2017 study found that affirmative action in the United States "increases the black share of employees over time: in 5 years after an establishment is first regulated, the black share of employees increases by an average of 0.8 percentage points. Strikingly, the black share continues to grow at a similar pace even after an establishment is deregulated. One could argue that this persistence is driven in part by affirmative action inducing employers to improve their methods for screening potential hires."[86]
Polls[edit]
The examples and perspective in this section deal primarily with the United States and do not represent a worldwide view of the subject. You may improve this article, discuss the issue on the talk page, or create a new article, as appropriate. (May 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)
According to a poll taken by USA Today in 2005, the majority of Americans support affirmative action for women, while views on minority groups were more split.[87] Men are only slightly more likely to support affirmative action for women; though a majority of both do.[87] However, a slight majority of Americans do believe that affirmative action goes beyond ensuring access and goes into the realm of preferential treatment.[87] More recently, a Quinnipiac poll from June 2009 finds that 55% of Americans feel that affirmative action in general should be discontinued, though 55% support it for people with disabilities.[88] A Gallup poll from 2005 showed that 72% of black Americans and 44% of white Americans supported racial affirmative action (with 21% and 49% opposing), with support and opposition among Hispanics falling between those of blacks and whites. Support among blacks, unlike among whites, had almost no correlation with political affiliation.[89]
A 2009 Quinnipiac University Polling Institute survey found 65% of American voters opposed the application of affirmative action to gay people, with 27% indicating they supported it.[90]
A Leger poll taken in 2010 found 59% of Canadians opposed considering race, gender, or ethnicity when hiring for government jobs.[91]
A 2014 Pew Research Center poll found that 63% of Americans thought affirmative action programs aimed at increasing minority representation on college campuses were "a good thing", compared to 30% who thought they were "a bad thing".[92] The following year, Gallup released a poll showing that 67% of Americans supported affirmative action programs aimed at increasing female representation, compared to 58% who supported such programs aimed at increasing the representation of racial minorities.[93]
Criticism[edit]
See also: Resistance to diversity efforts in organizations
Opponents of affirmative action such as George Sher believe that affirmative action devalues the accomplishments of people who are chosen based on the social group to which they belong rather than their qualifications, thus rendering affirmative action counterproductive.[94] Opponents,[95] who sometimes say that affirmative action is reverse discrimination, further claim that affirmative action has undesirable side-effects in addition to failing to achieve its goals. They argue that it hinders reconciliation, replaces old wrongs with new wrongs, undermines the achievements of minorities, and encourages individuals to identify themselves as disadvantaged, even if they are not. It may increase racial tension and benefit the more privileged people within minority groups at the expense of the least fortunate within majority groups (such as lower-class white people).[96]
Opponents claim that cases such as Fisher v. University of Texas are few of the many examples that show how reverse discrimination can take place. In 2008, Abigail Fisher, who is a native to Texas, sued the University of Texas at Austin, claiming that she was denied admission to the university because she was "white". The students that are of top 10% in the applicants of the University of Texas are admitted and there are students that compete to barely make it in on the threshold, such as Abigail Fisher. In such cases, race becomes an important factor in deciding who gets admitted to the university, and Fisher argued that discriminating and accepting students according to their race is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which ensures equal protection of the law and the citizen's privilege as a citizen of United States. The constitutionality of affirmative action in college admissions is now back before the Supreme Court in the case Fisher v. University of Texas (2016).[97]
American economist and social and political commentator, Thomas Sowell identified some negative results of race-based affirmative action in his book, Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study.[98] Sowell writes that affirmative action policies encourage non-preferred groups to designate themselves as members of preferred groups (i.e., primary beneficiaries of affirmative action) to take advantage of group preference policies; that they tend to benefit primarily the most fortunate among the preferred group (e.g., upper and middle class blacks), often to the detriment of the least fortunate among the non-preferred groups (e.g., poor whites or Asians); that they reduce the incentives of both the preferred and non-preferred to perform at their best – the former because doing so is unnecessary and the latter because it can prove futile – thereby resulting in net losses for society as a whole; and that they increase animosity toward preferred groups.
Mismatching[edit]
Mismatching is the term given to the negative effect that affirmative action has when it places a student into a college that is too difficult for him or her. For example, according to the theory, in the absence of affirmative action, a student will be admitted to a college that matches his or her academic ability and have a good chance of graduating. However, according to the mismatching theory, affirmative action often places a student into a college that is too difficult, and this increases the student's chance of dropping out. Thus, according to the theory, affirmative action hurts its intended beneficiaries, because it increases their dropout rate.[99][100][101]
Evidence in support of the mismatching theory was presented by Gail Heriot, a professor of law at the University of San Diego and a member of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, in a 24 August 2007 article published in the Wall Street Journal. The article reported on a 2004 study that was conducted by UCLA law professor Richard Sander and published in the Stanford Law Review. The study concluded that there were 7.9% fewer black attorneys than there would have been if there had been no affirmative action. The study was titled, "A Systemic Analysis of Affirmative Action in American Law Schools."[102] The article also states that because of mismatching, blacks are more likely to drop out of law school and fail bar exams.[103]
Sander's paper on mismatching has been criticized by several law professors, including Ian Ayres and Richard Brooks from Yale who argue that eliminating affirmative action would actually reduce the number of black lawyers by 12.7%.[104] A 2008 study by Jesse Rothstein and Albert H. Yoon confirmed Sander's mismatch findings, but also found that eliminating affirmative action would "lead to a 63 percent decline in black matriculants at all law schools and a 90 percent decline at elite law schools."[105] These high numbers predictions were doubted in a review of previous studies by Peter Arcidiacono and Michael Lovenheim. Their 2016 article found a strong indication that affirmative action results in a mismatch effect. They argued that the attendance by some African-American students to less-selective schools would significantly improve the low first attempt rate at passing the state bar, but they cautioned that such improvements could be outweighed by decreases in law school attendance.[106]
A 2011 study proposed that mismatch can only occur when a selective school possesses private information that, had this information been disclosed, would have changed the student's choice of school. The study found that this is in fact the case for Duke University, and that this information predicts the student's academic performance after beginning college.[107]
A 2016 study on affirmative action in India fails to find evidence for the mismatching hypothesis.[108] .But other studies have found evidence for mismatch. In India 90% IIT-Roorkee dropouts are backward caste [109]
See also[edit]
Achievement gap in the United States
Affirmative action bake sale
Angry white male
Civil and political rights
Disability rights movement
Diversity (business)
Diversity training
Economic discrimination
Equal opportunity
Ethnic penalty
"Harrison Bergeron"
Jewish quota
Legacy preferences
Minority rights
Multiculturalism
Numerus clausus
Political correctness
Positive liberty
Principle-policy puzzle
Progressive stack
Quotaism
Reasonable accommodation
Special measures for gender equality in the United Nations
Strong-basis-in-evidence standard
Social justice
Tokenism
White guilt
Women's rights
Notes[edit]
Jump up ^ "positive discrimination". Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 13 February 2014.
Jump up ^ "affirmative action". Oxford Dictionaries. Oxford University Press. Retrieved 13 February 2014.
^ Jump up to: a b "Executive Order 11246—Equal employment opportunity". The Federal Register. Archived from the original on 30 March 2010. Retrieved 5 February 2010.
Jump up ^ "Affirmative Action". Stanford University. Retrieved 4 June 2012.
^ Jump up to: a b "Highlights of the 2002–2003 Supreme Court Term". Supct.law.cornell.edu. Retrieved 1 September 2013.
^ Jump up to: a b c Commission for Racial Equality (29 September 2006). "Affirmative action around the world". Catalyst. Commission for Racial Equality. Archived from the original on 24 September 2007.
^ Jump up to: a b GOV.UK (4 April 2013). "Types of discrimination`". Discrimination: your rights. GOV.UK. Retrieved 7 April 2013.
^ Jump up to: a b Personneltoday.com "Is there a case for positive discrimination?" Archived 5 January 2008 at the Wayback Machine.
Jump up ^ "President Kennedy's E.O.10925: Seedbed of Affirmative Action" (PDF). Society for History in the Federal Government. Retrieved 27 September 2015.
Jump up ^ A Brief History of Affirmative Action Archived 12 May 2015 at the Wayback Machine., University of California, Irvine (access date 16 May 2015)
^ Jump up to: a b "Affirmative Action: History and Rationale". Clinton Administration's Affirmative Action Review: Report to the President. 19 July 1995.
Jump up ^ "Affirmative Action". Harvard Blogs. Harvard Law School. Archived from the original on 18 May 2015. Retrieved 30 April 2015.
Jump up ^ "Equal Opportunity & Affirmative Action Policy Statement". chatham.edu. Retrieved 30 April 2015.
Jump up ^ Sowell, Thomas (2004). Affirmative Action Around the World: An Empirical Study, Yale University Press, ISBN 0-300-10199-6
^ Jump up to: a b "Affirmative Action". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 1 April 2009.
Jump up ^ Fidan Ana Kurtulus, "Affirmative Action and the Occupational Advancement of Minorities and Women During 1973–2003," Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society (2012) 51#2 pp 213-246. online
Jump up ^ Kim, Sunhee; Kim, Seoyong (March 2014). "Exploring the effect of four factors on affirmative action programs for women". Asian Journal of Women's Studies. Ewha Womans University Press. 20 (1): 30–69. Archived from the original on 2015-09-04. Pdf. Archived 24 June 2015 at the Wayback Machine.
Jump up ^ "The EU's Boardroom Quota Battle Is Over, But Women Cannot Yet Rest". Forbes.com.
Jump up ^ "Uppsala discriminated against Swedes". The Local. 21 December 2006.
Jump up ^ "Job Reservations Act". South End Museum. Retrieved 31 March 2011.
Jump up ^ "White Workers and the Colour Bar". Sahistory.org.za. Archived from the original on 19 March 2014. Retrieved 31 May 2015.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e Race, law and poverty in the new South Africa, The Economist, 30 September 1999
^ Jump up to: a b c d e Stokes, G. (15 March 2010). "The problem with affirmative action". Fanews.co.za.
Jump up ^ [1] Archived 18 March 2014 at the Wayback Machine.
Jump up ^ "Employment Equity FAQ". Southafrica.info. Archived from the original on 1 April 2012. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ "BEE's Glass Slipper". Mg.co.za. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ "BEE: A man made disaster". Moneyweb.co.za. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ "'SAB deal to enrich black elite': Fin24: Companies". Fin24. Archived from the original on 3 October 2011. Retrieved 29 July 2010.
Jump up ^ "Business Report – Home – Motlanthe warns BEE council has failed". Busrep.co.za. 9 February 2010. Archived from the original on 16 May 2016. Retrieved 29 July 2010.
Jump up ^ "Manyi vows to get tough over BEE – Mail & Guardian Online: The smart news source". Mg.co.za. Retrieved 29 July 2010.
^ Jump up to: a b Bergmann, B. (1999). "The continuing need for affirmative action. The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, 39(5), 757-768".
^ Jump up to: a b "Black economic empowerment. (n.d.)". Southafrica.info. Archived from the original on 1 November 2012.
Jump up ^ Franchi, V. (2003). "The racialization of affirmative action in organizational discourses: A case study of symbolic racism in post-apartheid south africa". International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 27(2), 157–87.
^ Jump up to: a b Edigheji, O. (2006). "Affirmative action and state capacity in a democratic South Africa. Policy: issues & actors, 20(4)" (PDF). cps.org.za. Archived from the original (PDF) on 19 May 2014.
^ Jump up to: a b c d e Goga, F. (n.d.). A critique of affirmative action: The concept. Retrieved from "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 22 June 2012. Retrieved 2012-11-05.
Jump up ^ Graduate Student Admission Ordainment – Ministry of Education, PRC[dead link]
Jump up ^ "Ethnic and Religious Affairs Commission of Guangdong Province". Mzzjw.gd.gov.cn. 15 October 2007. Archived from the original on 5 January 2009. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ Hasmath, Reza (November 2011). "The education of ethnic minorities in Beijing". Ethnic and Racial Studies. 34 (11): 1835–54. doi:10.1080/01419870.2011.553238.
Jump up ^ Alon, Sigal (2011). "The Diversity Dividends of a Need-blind and Color-blind Affirmative Action Policy". Social Science Research, 40(6):1494-1505.
Jump up ^ "משרד הכלכלה והתעשייה". משרד הכלכלה והתעשייה. Retrieved 22 October 2017.
Jump up ^ http://che.org.il/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/%D7%94%D7%97%D7%9C%D7%98%D7%AA-%D7%95%D7%AA%D7%AA-%D7%9E%D7%A1-1-%D7%AA%D7%A9%D7%A2%D7%93.pdf
Jump up ^ Izraeli, Dafna (March–April 2003). "Gender Politics in Israel: The Case of Affirmative Action for Women Directors". Women's Studies International Forum. 26 (2): 109–128. doi:10.1016/S0277-5395(03)00043-8.
Jump up ^ "OBCs form 41% of population: Survey - Times of India". The Times of India. Retrieved 2018-01-03.
Jump up ^ "Affirmative Action and Peer Effects: Evidence from Caste Based Reservation in General Education Colleges in India" (PDF).
Jump up ^ "Guess how many Indians get merit-based scholarships". Rediff. Retrieved 2018-01-03.
Jump up ^ "Encyclopedia of the Nations, "Malaysia Poverty and Wealth"". Nationsencyclopedia.com. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ Perumal, M. (1989). "Economic Growth and Income Inequality in Malaysia, 1957–1984". Singapore Economic Review. 34 (2): 33–46.
Jump up ^ "Did the British Divide & Rule Ceylon? | Ilankai Tamil Sangam". Sangam.org. Retrieved 1 September 2013.
Jump up ^ "Indigenous peoples - Minority Rights Group".
Jump up ^ Donald B. Holsinger; W. James Jacob (29 May 2009). Inequality in Education: Comparative and International Perspectives. Springer Science & Business Media. p. 295. ISBN 978-90-481-2652-1.
Jump up ^ "原住民學生升學保障及原住民公費留學辦法(民國 102 年08月19 日 )" [Aboriginal Students Enrollment Guarantee and Public Funding for Aboriginal Study Abroad Act] (in Chinese). Ministry of Justice (Taiwan).
^ Jump up to: a b "Hakuopas 2011. Lääketieteen ja hammaslääketieteen opiskelijavalinnat" (PDF) (in Finnish). Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki. 2011. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2 October 2011. Retrieved 4 June 2011.
Jump up ^ "Oikeustieteellinen tiedekunta. Hakuopas 2011" (PDF) (in Finnish). Faculty of Law, University of Helsinki. 2011. p. 3. Retrieved 4 June 2011.
Jump up ^ Jonathan D. Mott, Ph.D. (7 February 1992). "The French Constitution of 1958 and its Amendments". Thisnation.com. Retrieved 28 April 2014.
Jump up ^ Ghorbal, Karim., "Essence coloniale d’une politique contemporaine: pour une approche fanonienne de la discrimination positive en France". Culture & History Digital Journal 4.2 (2015). Web.
Jump up ^ Jean-Pierre Steinhofer, "Beur ou ordinaire", Armée d'ajourd'hui, 1991.
Jump up ^ "Le Plan Sarkozy". Le Monde. 17 December 2008. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ "Vie Publique". Vie-publique.fr. 25 June 2002. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ Susanne Vieth-Entus (29. December 2008): "Sozialquote: Berliner Gymnasien sollen mehr Schüler aus armen Familien aufnehmen". Der Tagesspiegel
Jump up ^ Martin Klesmann (23 February 2009). "'Kinder aus Neukölln würden sich nicht integrieren lassen' – Ein Politiker und ein Schulleiter streiten über Sozialquoten an Gymnasien". Berliner Zeitung
Jump up ^ "LOV-1997-06-13-45 Lov om allmennaksjeselskaper (allmennaksjeloven)". Lovdata.no. Retrieved 29 July 2010.
Jump up ^ "27.000 flere bedrifter i Norge". nettavisen.no. Retrieved 31 May 2015.
Jump up ^ Seierstad, Cathrine; Opsahl, Tore (March 2011). "For the few not the many? The effects of affirmative action on presence, prominence, and social capital of women directors in Norway". Scandinavian Journal of Management. 27 (1): 44–54. doi:10.1016/j.scaman.2010.10.002.
Jump up ^ "Studie: Kjønnskvotering ingen effekt på lønnsomhet". e24.no. Retrieved 5 June 2018.
Jump up ^ Eckbo, Espen; Nygaard, Knut; Thorburn, Karin (December 26, 2016). "How Costly Is Forced Gender-Balancing of Corporate Boards?". European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI) - Finance Working Paper No. 463/2016; Tuck School of Business Working Paper No. 2746786. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2746786.
Jump up ^ "Romii – PROGRESE ÎNREGISTRATE ÎN ROMÂNIA ÎN PERIOADA 2007–2008". Retrieved 30 January 2013. [dead link]
Jump up ^ "Представители коренных малочисленных народов Севера имеют право получить бесплатную юридическую помощь". 2016-02-18.
Jump up ^ Goldirova, Renata. "Slovakia bans positive discrimination". Euobserver.com. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ "Equality Act 2010". Legislation.gov.uk. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ "UK | N Ireland | Police recruitment 'will be 50:50'". BBC News. 12 September 2001. Retrieved 1 September 2013.
Jump up ^ Richard Kelly and Isobel White (29 April 2009). All-women shortlists (PDF). House of Commons Library. SN/PC/05057. Retrieved 23 June 2009.
Jump up ^ "GNWT – Human Resources – Affirmative Action". Hr.gov.nt.ca. 3 April 2012. Archived from the original on 3 August 2012. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ "President Kennedy's E.O.10925: Seedbed of Affirmative Action" (PDF). Society for History in the Federal Government. Retrieved 27 September 2015.
Jump up ^ "Executive Order 10925 – Establishing The President's Committee On Equal Employment Opportunity". U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. Archived from the original on 27 May 2010. Retrieved 5 February 2010.
Jump up ^ "Executive Order 11246 and Affirmative Action « Publishing the Long Civil Rights Movement". Archived from the original on 19 October 2014.
Jump up ^ "Federal Employment Discrimination Laws". EmployeeIssues.com. Retrieved 18 May 2010.
Jump up ^ Indy fire-fighters sue city, charge bias; also see Norma M. Riccucci. Managing Diversity in Public Sector Workforces. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 2002
Jump up ^ Steven M. Teles (2010). The Rise of the Conservative Legal Movement: The Battle for Control of the Law. Princeton University Press. pp. 235–37. ISBN 1400829690.
Jump up ^ "Human Rights Act 1993 No 82 (as of 1 July 2013), Public Act 73 Measures to ensure equality – New Zealand Legislation". Legislation.govt.nz. 1 July 2013. Retrieved 1 September 2013.
Jump up ^ "New Zealand Bill of Rights Act 1990 No 109 (as of 1 July 2013), Public Act 19 Freedom from discrimination – New Zealand Legislation". Legislation.govt.nz. 1 July 2013. Retrieved 1 September 2013.
Jump up ^ Plummer, Robert. "Black Brazil Seeks a Better Future." BBC News São Paulo, 25 September 2006. 16 November 2006
Jump up ^ Por Rodrigo Haidar e Filipe Coutinho. "DEM entra com ADPF contra cotas raciais" (in Portuguese). Conjur.com.br. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ Débora Santos. "Supremo decide pro unanimidade pela constiucionalidade das cotas" (in Portuguese). g1.globo.com. Retrieved 3 June 2012.
^ Jump up to: a b United Nations Committee on Human Rights, General Comment 18 on Non-discrimination, Paragraph 10
Jump up ^ Christophe Jaffrelot, India's Silent Revolution: The rise of lower castes in northern India, p. 321. 2003
Jump up ^ Miller, Conrad (2017). "The Persistent Effect of Temporary Affirmative Action". American Economic Journal: Applied Economics. 9 (3): 152. doi:10.1257/app.20160121.
^ Jump up to: a b c "Usatoday.Com". Usatoday.Com. 20 May 2005. Retrieved 28 April 2014.
Jump up ^ Quinnipiac University – Office of Public Affairs (3 June 2009). "National (US) Poll * June 3, 2009 * U.S. Voters Disagree 3–1 With – Quinnipiac University – Hamden, Connecticut". Quinnipiac.edu. Archived from the original on 6 June 2009. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ Jones, Jeffrey M. (23 August 2005). "Race, Ideology, and Support for Affirmative Action". Gallup. Retrieved 11 March 2013.
Jump up ^ U.S. Voters Disagree 3–1 With Sotomayor On Key Case. Quinnipiac University. Published 3 June 2009.
Jump up ^ David Akin, QMI Agency Parliamentary Bureau Chief (12 August 2010). "Canadians against job hiring quotas". Toronto Sun. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ Drake, Bruce (22 April 2014). "Public strongly backs affirmative action programs on campus". Pew Research Center. Retrieved 16 March 2017.
Jump up ^ Riffkin, Rebecca (26 August 2015). "Higher Support for Gender Affirmative Action Than Race". Gallup. Retrieved 16 March 2017.
Jump up ^ Sher, George, "Preferential Hiring", in Tom Regan (ed.), Just Business: New Introductory Essays In Business Ethics, Philadelphia, Temple University Press, 1983, p. 40.
Jump up ^ "American Civil Rights Institute". Acri.org. Archived from the original on 11 April 2012. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ Cultural Whiplash: Unforeseen Consequences of America's Crusade Against Racial Discrimination / Patrick Garry (2006) ISBN 1-58182-569-2
Jump up ^ Toobin, Jeffrey (1 May 2012). "Fisher v. University of Texas and the End of Affirmative Action". The New Yorker. Retrieved 1 September 2013.
Jump up ^ ISBN 0-300-10199-6, 2004
Jump up ^ Does affirmative action hurt minorities?, Los Angeles Times, 26 September 2007
Jump up ^ Quotas on trial, by Thomas Sowell, 8 January 2003
Jump up ^ Heriot, Gail L. (2010). "Want to Be a Doctor? A Scientist? An Engineer? An Affirmative Action Leg Up May Hurt Your Chances". Engage. San Diego Legal Studies Paper. doi:10.2139/ssrn.3112683.
Jump up ^ Affirmative Action Backfires, by Gail Heriot, Wall Street Journal, 24 August 2007
Jump up ^ Sander, Richard (2004). "A SYSTEMIC ANALYSIS OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN AMERICAN LAW SCHOOLS" (PDF). Stanford Law Review: 367–483. Archived from the original (PDF) on 15 September 2011. Retrieved 13 July 2011.
Jump up ^ Fisman, Ray. "Slate.com". Slate.com. Retrieved 11 April 2012.
Jump up ^ Jaschik, Scott (3 September 2008). "Attacking the 'Mismatch' Critique of Affirmative Action". Inside Higher Education. Retrieved 27 January 2016.
Jump up ^ Arcidiacono, Peter; Lovenheim, Michael (March 2016). "Affirmative Action and the Quality-Fit Tradeoff". Journal of Economic Literature. 54 (1): 30, 31, 69. doi:10.1257/jel.54.1.3. Retrieved 25 May 2016.
Jump up ^ Arcidiacono, Peter; Aucejo, Esteban M.; Fang, Hanming; Spenner, Kenneth I. (November 2011). "Does affirmative action lead to mismatch? A new test and evidence" (PDF). Quantitative Economics. 2 (3): 303–33. doi:10.3982/QE83.
Jump up ^ Surendrakumar, Bagde,; Dennis, Epple,; Lowell, Taylor, (2016-06-01). "Does Affirmative Action Work? Caste, Gender, College Quality, and Academic Success in India". American Economic Review. 106 (6): 1495. doi:10.1257/aer.20140783. ISSN 0002-8282.
Jump up ^ https://www.firstpost.com/india/90-percent-of-iit-roorkee-dropouts-are-backward-caste-a-case-against-affirmative-action-2379964.html
References[edit]
Anderson, Terry H. (2004). The pursuit of fairness: a history of affirmative action. Oxford New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780195157642.
Featherman, David L.; Hall, Martin; Krislov, Marvin, eds. (2010). The next twenty-five years: affirmative action in higher education in the United States and South Africa. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press. ISBN 9780472033775. Forewords by: Mary Sue Coleman, President of the University of Michigan and Njabulo Ndebele, Former Vice-Chancellor and Principal of the University of Cape Town. Details.
Golland, David Hamilton (2008). Constructing affirmative action: federal contract compliance and the building construction trades, 1956–1973 (Ph.D. thesis). City University of New York. OCLC 279305174. Order No. DA3325474.
Vieth-Entus, Susanne (29 December 2008). Sozialquote: Berliner Gymnasien sollen mehr Schüler aus armen Familien aufnehmen. Der Tagesspiegel
Bossuyt, Marc (17 June 2002). "United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights". UN Economic and Social Council. Archived from the original on 16 October 2015. E/CN.4/Sub.2/2002/21 Pdf.
Riccucci, Norma M. (2002). Managing diversity in public sector workforces. Essentials of Public Policy and Administration Series. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press. ISBN 9780813398389.
Further reading[edit]
Anderson, Elizabeth S. (2002). "Integration, affirmative action, and strict scrutiny". NYU Law Review. New York University School of Law. 77: 1195–271. Pdf.
Bolick, Clint (2008). "Affirmative Action". In Hamowy, Ronald. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage; Cato Institute. pp. 6–8. doi:10.4135/9781412965811.n5. ISBN 978-1-4129-6580-4. LCCN 2008009151. OCLC 750831024.
Boxill, Bernard; Boxill, Jan (2005), "Affirmative action", in Frey, R.G.; Heath Wellman, Christopher, A companion to applied ethics, Blackwell Companions to Philosophy, Oxford, UK Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell Publishing, pp. 89–101, doi:10.1002/9780470996621.ch9, ISBN 9781405133456.
Condit, Deirdre M.; Condit, Celeste M.; Achter, Paul J. (Spring 2001). "Human equality, affirmative action, and genetic models of human variation". Rhetoric & Public Affairs. Michigan State University Press via JSTOR. 4 (1): 85–108. doi:10.1353/rap.2001.0003. JSTOR 41939651.
Ghorbal, Karim (2015). "Essence coloniale d'une politique contemporaine: pour une approche fanonienne de la discrimination positive en France". Culture & History Digital Journal. CSIC. 4 (2): e016. doi:10.3989/chdj.2015.016.
Harpalani, Vinay (November 2012). "Diversity within racial groups and the constitutionality of race-conscious admissions". University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law. University of Pennsylvania Law School. 15 (2): 463–537. Pdf.
Cited in Society of American Law Teachers (S.A.L.T.) amicus brief to U.S. Supreme Court in Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 11-345 (argued 10 October 2012). Also available at the Social Science Research Network (SSRN).
Harpalani, Vinay (February 2013). "Fisher's fishing expedition". University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law. University of Pennsylvania Law School. 15 (1): 57–74. Pdf.
Invited commentary on oral arguments in Fisher v. University of Texas, No. 11-345 (argued 10 October 2012). Also available at the Social Science Research Network (SSRN).
Hasmath, Reza (2011). Managing ethnic diversity: meanings and practices from an international perspective. Farnham Burlington, Vermont: Ashgate. ISBN 9781409411215.
Pollak, Oliver B. (1983). "Antisemitism, the Harvard Plan, and the roots of reverse discrimination". Jewish Social Studies. Indiana University Press via JSTOR. 45 (2): 113–22. JSTOR 4467214.
External links[edit]
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Affirmative action.
Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). "Affirmative Action". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
"Affirmative action collected news and commentary". The New York Times.
Affirmative Action collected news and commentary at The Washington Post
Does the success of Barack Obama mean we no longer need affirmative action? NOW on PBS investigates
An interview with Professor Randall Kennedy about the presidency of Barack Obama and affirmative action Clifford Armion for La Clé des langues.
Substantive Equality, Positive Action and Roma Rights in the European Union, Report by Minority Rights Group International
Intelligence Squared debate: Affirmative Action on Campus Does More Harm than Good
show
v
t
e
Employment
Classifications
Casual
Contingent
Full-time
Part-time
Self-employed
Skilled
Independent contractor
Temporary
Tenure
Unskilled
Wage labour
Hiring
Application
Background check
Business networking
Contract
Cover letter
Curriculum Vitae (CV)
Drug testing
e-recruitment
Employment counsellor
Executive search
Induction programme
Job fair
Job fraud
Job hunting
Job interview
Labour brokering
Overqualification
Onboarding
Personality-job fit theory
Person-environment fit
Probation
Reference
Résumé
Simultaneous recruiting of new graduates
Underemployment
Work-at-home scheme
Roles
Co-op
Employee
Employer
Internship
Job
Permanent
Permatemp
Supervisor
Volunteer
Worker class
Blue-collar
Gold-collar
Green-collar
Grey-collar
Pink-collar
White-collar
Career and training
Apprenticeship
Avocation
Career assessment
Career counseling
Career development
Coaching
Creative class
Education
Continuing education
Continuing professional development
E-learning
Employability
Further education
Graduate school
Induction training
Initial Professional Development
Knowledge worker
Licensure
Lifelong learning
Practice-based professional learning
Professional association
Professional certification
Professional development
Professional school
Reflective practice
Retraining
Vocational education
Vocational school
Vocational university
Mentorship
Occupational Outlook Handbook
Practice firm
Profession
Tradesman
Vocation
Attendance
Break
Career break
Furlough
Gap year
Leave of absence
Long service leave
No call, no show
Sabbatical
Sick leave
Time clock
Schedules
Four-day week
Eight-hour day
Flextime
Overtime
Retroactive overtime
Shift work
Telecommuting
Working time
Workweek and weekend
Wages and salaries
Income bracket
Income tax
Living wage
Maximum wage
National average salary
World
Europe
Minimum wage
Canada
Hong Kong
Europe
United States
Progressive wage
Singapore
Overtime rate
Paid time off
Performance-related pay
Salary
Salary cap
Working poor
Benefits
Annual leave
Casual Friday
Day care
Disability insurance
Health insurance
Life insurance
Parental leave
Pension
Sick leave
Take-home vehicle
Safety and health
Epilepsy and employment
Human factors and ergonomics
Industrial noise
Karōshi
Protective clothing
Occupational burnout
Occupational disease
Occupational exposure limit
Occupational health psychology
Occupational injury
Occupational stress
Repetitive strain injury
Sick building syndrome
Work accident
Occupational fatality
Workers' compensation
Workplace phobia
Workplace wellness
Equality
Affirmative action
Equal pay for women
Gender pay gap
Glass ceiling
Infractions
Corporate abuse
Accounting scandals
Corporate behaviour
Corporate crime
Control fraud
Corporate scandals
Discrimination
Dress code
Employee handbook
Employee monitoring
Evaluation
Labour law
Sexual harassment
Sleeping while on duty
Wage theft
Whistleblower
Workplace bullying
Workplace harassment
Workplace incivility
Willingness
Boreout
Civil conscription
Conscription
Dead-end job
Extreme careerism
Job satisfaction
Organizational commitment
McJob
Refusal of work
Slavery
Bonded labour
Human trafficking
Labour camp
Penal labour
Peonage
Truck system
Unfree labour
Wage slavery
Workaholic
Work aversion
Work ethic
Work–life balance
Downshifting (lifestyle)
Slow living
Termination
At-will employment
Dismissal
Banishment room
Constructive dismissal
Wrongful dismissal
Employee exit management
Exit interview
Layoff
Notice period
Pink slip
Resignation
Letter of resignation
Restructuring
Retirement
Mandatory retirement
Retirement age
Severance package
Golden handshake
Golden parachute
Turnover
Unemployment
Barriers to Employment
Depression
Great Depression
Long Depression
Discouraged worker
Frictional unemployment
Full employment
Graduate unemployment
Involuntary unemployment
Jobless recovery
Phillips curve
Recession
Great Recession
Great Recession job losses
List of recessions
Recession-proof job
Reserve army of labour
Types of unemployment
Unemployment Convention
Unemployment benefits
Unemployment extension
Unemployment insurance
Unemployment rates
Employment rates
Employment-to-population ratio
Structural unemployment
Technological unemployment
Wage curve
Youth unemployment
See also templates
Aspects of corporations
Aspects of jobs
Aspects of occupations
Aspects of organizations
Aspects of workplaces
Corporate titles
Organized labor
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Affirmative_action&oldid=856347863"
Categories:
Affirmative action
Discrimination
Prejudice and discrimination
Race and law
Majority–minority relations
Hidden categories:
Webarchive template wayback links
All articles with dead external links
Articles with dead external links from June 2016
CS1 Chinese-language sources (zh)
CS1 Finnish-language sources (fi)
CS1 Portuguese-language sources (pt)
Use dmy dates from December 2015
Wikipedia articles needing style editing from May 2018
All articles needing style editing
Articles containing potentially dated statements from 2007
All articles containing potentially dated statements
Articles with limited geographic scope from May 2010
USA-centric
Navigation menu
Personal tools
Not logged in
Talk
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Namespaces
Article
Talk
Variants
Views
Read
Edit
View history
More
Search
Navigation
Main page
Contents
Featured content
Current events
Random article
Donate to Wikipedia
Wikipedia store
Interaction
Help
About Wikipedia
Community portal
Recent changes
Contact page
Tools
What links here
Related changes
Upload file
Special pages
Permanent link
Page information
Wikidata item
Cite this page
Print/export
Create a book
Download as PDF
Printable version
In other projects
Wikimedia Commons
Languages
Afrikaans
العربية
Беларуская (тарашкевіца)
Català
Чӑвашла
Čeština
Deutsch
Eesti
Español
Esperanto
فارسی
Français
Gaeilge
Galego
한국어
Հայերեն
हिन्दी
Bahasa Indonesia
Italiano
עברית
Magyar
Bahasa Melayu
Nederlands
日本語
Norsk
Norsk nynorsk
Polski
Português
Română
Русский
Simple English
Српски / srpski
Suomi
Svenska
தமிழ்
Türkçe
中文
28 more
Edit links
This page was last edited on 24 August 2018, at 15:46 (UTC).
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.
Privacy policy
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Contact Wikipedia
Developers
Cookie statement
Mobile view
Enable previews

values: mw-page-base noprint

values: mw-head-base noprint

values: firstHeading firstHeading en

values: siteSub noprint

attrs: class href

values: mw-jump-link #mw-head

values: mw-jump-link #p-search

value: td

value: tr

value: th

attrs: class id href

values: NavToggle NavToggle1 #

attrs: class style

value: li

values: font-size: 105%; padding: 0px 0px 0.4em; text-align: center; display: none;

values: padding:0 0.1em 0.4em;padding-left:0; padding-right:0;

values: Discrimination against people with HIV/AIDS

values: Discrimination against non-binary gender persons

values:
/wiki/Anti-fat_bias
mw-redirect
Anti-fat bias

values:
/wiki/Animal_cruelty
mw-redirect
Animal cruelty

values: Men who have sex with men blood donor controversy

values: List of anti-cultural, anti-national, and anti-ethnic terms

values:
/wiki/Data_discrimination
mw-redirect
Data discrimination

values: Racial bias in criminal news in the United States

values: padding:0.3em 0.4em 0.3em;font-weight:bold;border-top: 1px solid #aaa; border-bottom: 1px solid #aaa;padding-top:0.1em;font-style:italic;

values: float:right;clear:right;width:22.0em;margin:0 0 1.0em 1.0em;background:#f9f9f9;border:1px solid #aaa;padding:0.2em;border-spacing:0.4em 0;text-align:center;line-height:1.4em;font-size:88%

values: checkbox button toctogglecheckbox toctogglecheckbox display:none

values: Job Reservations Act (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Native_Building_Workers_Act
mw-redirect
Native Building Workers Act

values: Apprenticeship Act (page does not exist)

values:
/wiki/Bantu_Education_Act
mw-redirect
Bantu Education Act

values: Edit section: Post-apartheid – the Employment Equity Act

values:
/wiki/Employment_Equity_Act
mw-redirect
Employment Equity Act

values:
/wiki/People_with_disabilities
mw-redirect
People with disabilities

values: Edit section: Affirmative Action Purpose

attrs: alt src width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-style ambox-debate

values:
/wiki/Backward_class
mw-redirect
Backward class

values:
/wiki/Malay_(ethnic_group)
mw-redirect
Malay (ethnic group)

values:
/wiki/Chinese_Malaysian
mw-redirect
Chinese Malaysian

values:
/wiki/Indian_Malaysian
mw-redirect
Indian Malaysian

values:
/wiki/Tamil_people
mw-redirect
Tamil people

values:
/wiki/Taiwanese_aborigines
mw-redirect
Taiwanese aborigines

values:
/wiki/French_Constitution
mw-redirect
French Constitution

values: Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany

values: plainlinks noexcerpt noprint asof-tag update

values:
/wiki/Ethnic_minorities
mw-redirect
Ethnic minorities

values:
/wiki/Titular_ethnicity
mw-redirect
Titular ethnicity

values:
/wiki/Northern_Ireland_Peace_Process
mw-redirect
Northern Ireland Peace Process

values:
/wiki/Patten_report
mw-redirect
Patten report

values: Independent Commission on Policing for Northern Ireland

values: Sex Discrimination (Election Candidates) Act 2002

values:
/wiki/All-women_shortlists
mw-redirect
All-women shortlists

values: Section Fifteen of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms

values:
/wiki/Canadian_Employment_Equity_Act
mw-redirect
Canadian Employment Equity Act

values:
/wiki/Visible_minorities
mw-redirect
Visible minorities

values: Edit section: International organizations

values: Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias

values: plainlinks metadata ambox ambox-content ambox-globalize

values:
/wiki/The_Gallup_Organization
mw-redirect
The Gallup Organization

values: Resistance to diversity efforts in organizations

values: Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution

values:
/wiki/U.S._Commission_on_Civil_Rights
mw-redirect
U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

values:
/wiki/Wall_Street_Journal
mw-redirect
Wall Street Journal

values: border-collapse: collapse; padding: 0; border: 0; background:transparent; width:100%;

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.oeod.uci.edu/aa.html

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.thelocal.se/20061221/5871

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.sahistory.org.za/luli-35

values:
nofollow
external text
http://www.economist.com/node/244570

values:
nofollow
external text
http://cps.org.za/cps%20pdf/pia20_4.pdf

values:
nofollow
external text
http://ccms.ukzn.ac.za/index.php

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1016/j.scaman.2010.10.002

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2746786

values:
nofollow
external text
http://sakhapress.ru/archives/207211

values:
nofollow
external text
http://euobserver.com/9/20123

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1257/app.20160121

values:
nofollow
http://www.acri.org/
external text

values:
nofollow
external text
https://ssrn.com/abstract=3112683

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3112683

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1257/jel.54.1.3

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.3982/QE83

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1257/aer.20140783

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/issn/0002-8282

values: -moz-column-width: 30em; -webkit-column-width: 30em; column-width: 30em; list-style-type: decimal;

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/279305174

values: United Nations Economic and Social Council

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.4135/9781412965811.n5

values:
nofollow
external text
//lccn.loc.gov/2008009151

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.worldcat.org/oclc/750831024

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1002/9780470996621.ch9

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.1353/rap.2001.0003

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/41939651

values:
nofollow
external text
//doi.org/10.3989/chdj.2015.016

values: University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law

values:
nofollow
external text
//www.jstor.org/stable/4467214

values:
/wiki/Personality-job_fit_theory
mw-redirect
Personality-job fit theory

values:
/wiki/Person-environment_fit
mw-redirect
Person-environment fit

values:
/wiki/Recommendation_letter
mw-redirect
Recommendation letter

values: Simultaneous recruiting of new graduates

values:
/wiki/Initial_Professional_Development
mw-redirect
Initial Professional Development

values: List of countries in Europe by monthly average wage

values:
/wiki/List_of_minimum_wages_in_Canada
mw-redirect
List of minimum wages in Canada

values: List of sovereign states in Europe by minimum wage

values:
/wiki/List_of_U.S._minimum_wages
mw-redirect
List of U.S. minimum wages

values:
/wiki/Industrial_noise
mw-redirect
Industrial noise

values:
/wiki/Protective_clothing
mw-redirect
Protective clothing

values:
/wiki/Equal_pay_for_women
mw-redirect
Equal pay for women

values:
/wiki/Corporate_abuse
mw-redirect
Corporate abuse

values:
/wiki/List_of_corporate_scandals
mw-redirect
List of corporate scandals

values:
/wiki/Truck_system
mw-redirect
Truck system

values:
/wiki/Employee_exit_management
mw-redirect
Employee exit management

values:
/wiki/Pink_slip_(employment)
mw-redirect
Pink slip (employment)

values: Job losses caused by the Great Recession

values:
/wiki/List_of_recessions
mw-redirect
List of recessions

values:
/wiki/Types_of_unemployment
mw-redirect
Types of unemployment

values:
/wiki/Unemployment_Convention
mw-redirect
Unemployment Convention

values:
/wiki/Unemployment_insurance
mw-redirect
Unemployment insurance

attrs: alt src title width height srcset data-file-width data-file-height

values:
/wiki/Template:Organized_labor_navbox
mw-redirect
Template:Organized labor navbox

values: nowraplinks hlist collapsible collapsed navbox-inner mw-collapsible mw-collapsed mw-made-collapsible

values: navigation navbox Employment padding:3px

values: Category:Webarchive template wayback links

values: Category:All articles with dead external links

values: Category:Articles with dead external links from June 2016

values: Category:CS1 Chinese-language sources (zh)

values: Category:CS1 Finnish-language sources (fi)

values: Category:CS1 Portuguese-language sources (pt)

values: Category:Use dmy dates from December 2015

values: Category:Wikipedia articles needing style editing from May 2018

values: Category:All articles needing style editing

values: Category:Articles containing potentially dated statements from 2007

values: Category:All articles containing potentially dated statements

values: Category:Articles with limited geographic scope from May 2010

values: Discussion about edits from this IP address [ctrl-alt-n]

values: A list of edits made from this IP address [ctrl-alt-y]

values: You are encouraged to create an account and log in; however, it is not mandatory

values: You're encouraged to log in; however, it's not mandatory. [ctrl-alt-o]

values:
/wiki/Affirmative_action
View the content page [ctrl-alt-c]
c

values: Discussion about the content page [ctrl-alt-t]

values: p-namespaces navigation vectorTabs p-namespaces-label

values:
p-variants
navigation
vectorMenu emptyPortlet
p-variants-label

values: Past revisions of this page [ctrl-alt-h]

values: A list of all special pages [ctrl-alt-q]

values: Permanent link to this revision of the page

values: Link to connected data repository item [ctrl-alt-g]

values: Printable version of this page [ctrl-alt-p]

values: portal navigation p-wikibase-otherprojects p-wikibase-otherprojects-label

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-af
display: none;

values: تمييز إيجابي – Arabic

values: Станоўчае дзеяньне – Belarusian (Taraškievica orthography)

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-be-x-old
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ca
display: none;

values: Позитивлă дискриминаци – Chuvash

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-cv
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-cs
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-de
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-et
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-eo
display: none;

values: تبعیض جبرانی – Persian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-fa
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ga
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-gl
display: none;

values: 적극적 우대조치 – Korean

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ko
display: none;

values: Կառուցողական գործողություն – Armenian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-hy
display: none;

values: सकारात्मक विभेद – Hindi

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-it
display: none;

values: העדפה מתקנת – Hebrew

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-he
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-hu
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-nl
display: none;

values: アファーマティブ・アクション – Japanese

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ja
display: none;

values:
https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kvotering
Kvotering – Norwegian
no
no
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-no
display: none;

values:
https://nn.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kvotering
Kvotering – Norwegian Nynorsk
nn
nn
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-nn
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-pl
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ro
display: none;

values: Позитивная дискриминация – Russian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-simple
display: none;

values: Афирмативна акција – Serbian

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-sr
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-fi
display: none;

values:
https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kvotering
Kvotering – Swedish
sv
sv
interlanguage-link-target

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-sv
display: none;

values: சீர்திருத்த செயலாக்கம் – Tamil

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-ta
display: none;

values:
interlanguage-link interwiki-tr
display: none;

values: All languages (initial selection from common choices by you and others)

values: /static/images/wikimedia-button-1.5x.png 1.5x, /static/images/wikimedia-button-2x.png 2x

values: /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_132x47.png 1.5x, /static/images/poweredby_mediawiki_176x62.png 2x

values:
suggestions
display: none; font-size: 13px;

values: mediawiki ltr sitedir-ltr mw-hide-empty-elt ns-0 ns-subject page-Affirmative_action rootpage-Affirmative_action skin-vector action-view