lmeck@sdcrdcf.UUCP (06/10/83)
I don't believe that the current affirmative action programs are the only
solutions (or even acceptable solutions) to the problem of racial
discrimination. I believe that a better solution is to enforce the
existing laws prohibiting discrimination and to attack the problems
created by past discrimination directly. These problems include cultural
isolation and deprivation as well as economic deprivation. Some more
direct solutions to these problems include:
1. Require schools and employers to accept applicants more on the
basis of demonstrated aptitude than on education and experience.
In addition, give employers economic incentives (tax deductions)
for educating and training undereducated/undertrained applicants:
this encourages employers to locate and hire such applicants
instead of hiring applicants recommended from within (what
mhb5b!smb calls the "old boy network").
2. Expand economic assistance programs for public education and
training of persons who demonstrate aptitude in a field, but who
are undereducated/undertrained.
I don't necessarily agree that all of what mhb5b!smb calls "statistical
discrimination patterns" are really discrimination or that they need to be
remedied. It is possible that some form of affirmative action is needed
to insure promotion of deserving women and minorities. However, if more
men than women want to be police officers and more women want to be dress
designers, what compelling reason is there to try to change such "societal
patterns"? I don't believe that we have to force the composition of every
workplace to reflect the composition of society in order to solve the
problem of discrimination.
Because affirmative action programs provide little incentive for giving
full education and training to minorities, minority unemployment continues
to be high; this allows minorities to allege that racism is rampant and
allows bigots to allege that minorities are lazy and stupid. I believe
that the best solution to problems of discrimination is to give various
elements of society a positive incentive to help *all* people those whose
abilities are going to waste because of a lack of education and/or
training. I am afraid, however, that too many policymakers on both sides
of the issue have become more interested in symbolic action than in
effective action against discrimination and that too many people have been
persuaded that the symbolic value of affirmative action programs is
worthwhile (mhb5b!smb states enthusiastically that these programs
"encourage awareness of the problem of discrimination"). This "rub-their-
nose-in-it" attitude is one of the most counterproductive aspects of
affirmative action: people like myself who have no real desire to
discriminate against anyone become antagonistic when continually pestered
by crusaders trying to "raise our consciousness" and make us feel guilty
for something we haven't done.smb@mhb5b.UUCP (06/13/83)
I don't necessarily agree that all of what mhb5b!smb calls "statistical discrimination patterns" are really discrimination or that they need to be remedied. It is possible that some form of affirmative action is needed to insure promotion of deserving women and minorities. However, if more men than women want to be police officers and more women want to be dress designers, what compelling reason is there to try to change such "societal patterns"? I don't believe that we have to force the composition of every workplace to reflect the composition of society in order to solve the problem of discrimination. I never advocated matching the composition of every workplace to that of society; I'm fully aware of restrictions (such as interest and qualifications) that would make such a goal impractical even if I felt it desirable. But one of the studies I had in mind when I wrote my note was about promotion and pay patterns among women scientists. *After* correcting for age, experience, specialty, etc., the researchers found that women were promoted less often, and even at comparable ranks received salaries that were 80% of what their male colleagues received. (This study was conducted by the U.S. Department of Labor, and mentioned in Science News a few years ago. I can dig up the precise reference if anyone is interested.) Because affirmative action programs provide little incentive for giving full education and training to minorities, minority unemployment continues to be high; this allows minorities to allege that racism is rampant and allows bigots to allege that minorities are lazy and stupid. I believe that the best solution to problems of discrimination is to give various elements of society a positive incentive to help *all* people those whose abilities are going to waste because of a lack of education and/or training. On the contrary -- affirmative action provides plenty of incentive to supply education and training; if you're going to hire someone anyway, wouldn't you prefer that they were able to do the work?