scholarly journals Combatting Discrimination

2021 ◽  
pp. 79-91
Author(s):  
Rosita Fibbi ◽  
Arnfinn H. Midtbøen ◽  
Patrick Simon
Keyword(s):  
Affirmative Action ◽  
Racial Discrimination ◽  
Equal Opportunity ◽  
Racial Minorities ◽  
Unfair Treatment

AbstractThere is a large variety of policies and actions contributing to tackling discrimination against immigrants and ethno-racial minorities, and countries vary greatly in their strategies to tackle ethnic and racial discrimination. This chapter distinguishes between three main types of measures – antidiscrimination legislation, affirmative action and other equal opportunity policies, and tools for promoting diversity – and describe their origins as well as whether they are implemented in different contexts. The chapter also reviews studies that have aimed at assessing the effectiveness of measures to combat discrimination and concludes by pointing out the necessity of statistics broken down by ethnicity or race to uncover unfair treatment and disadvantage faced by minorities.

Affirmative action

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernard Boxill
Keyword(s):  
African Americans ◽  
Affirmative Action ◽  
Racial Discrimination ◽  
Ethnic Groups ◽  
Important Implication ◽  
Racial Minorities ◽  
Reverse Discrimination ◽  
Preferential Treatment ◽  
The Usa ◽  
Forward Looking

The term ‘affirmative action’ originated in the USA under President Kennedy. Originally it was designed to ensure that employees and applicants for jobs with government contractors did not suffer discrimination. Within a year, however, ‘affirmative action’ was used to refer to policies aimed at compensating African-Americans for unjust racial discrimination, and at improving their opportunities to gain employment. An important implication of this shift was that affirmative action came to mean preferential treatment. Preferential treatment was later extended to include women as well as other disadvantaged racial and ethnic groups. The arguments in favour of preferential treatment can be usefully classified as backward-looking and forward-looking. Backward-looking arguments rely on the claim that preferential treatment of women and disadvantaged racial minorities compensates these groups or the members for the discrimination and injustices they have suffered. Forward-looking arguments rely on their claim that preferential treatment of women and disadvantaged racial minorities will help to bring about a better society. There has been much criticism of both types of argument. The most common accusation is that preferential treatment is reverse discrimination. Other criticisms are based around who exactly should be compensated, by what means and to what extent, and at whose cost. Finally, there is the fear of the unknown consequences of such action. Arguments have been forwarded to try and solve such difficulties, but the future of preferential treatment seems to lie in a combination of the two arguments.

Multicolored Blindfolds

2017 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 825-834 ◽  
Author(s):  
Seval Gündemir ◽  
Adam D. Galinsky
Keyword(s):  
Racial Discrimination ◽  
Intergroup Relations ◽  
Side Effect ◽  
Racial Minorities ◽  
Organizational Diversity ◽  
Negative Side ◽  
Objective Information ◽  
Negative Side Effect ◽  
Multicultural Diversity

Past studies have found that multicultural approaches to diversity can reduce prejudice and stimulate positive intergroup relations. The current research explored a possible negative side effect of multiculturalism: whether organizational diversity structures geared toward multiculturalism can conceal racial discrimination and delegitimize racial discrimination claims. Three studies found that, even when objective information was indicative of discrimination, both Whites and racial minorities perceived organizations which had diversity policies emphasizing multiculturalism as more fair toward minorities. This perception of (false) fairness led individuals to perceive less racial discrimination and to view claims of racial discrimination against that organization as less legitimate. Furthermore, we found that organizational multiculturalism and externally granted diversity awards both produced a (false) fairness effect. The results suggest an irony of multicultural diversity structures: They can create a false fairness effect that conceals and delegitimizes discrimination.

Making Diversity Work for Everybody? The Double-Edged Sword of All-Inclusive Diversity

2021 ◽  
pp. 014616722110470
Author(s):  
Payton A. Small ◽  
Brenda Major ◽  
Cheryl Kaiser
Keyword(s):  
Mission Statement ◽  
Racial Minority ◽  
Racial Minorities ◽  
European Americans ◽  
Unfair Treatment ◽  
Multicultural Diversity ◽  
Racial Injustice ◽  
A Company

Three experiments investigated how framing diversity as all-inclusive affects recognition of racial injustice. Among Whites, viewing a company mission statement that specifically included Whites/European Americans when defining diversity or made no mention of diversity led to increased recognition of unfair treatment of racial minorities relative to viewing a standard multicultural diversity statement (Experiment 1). Decreased concern about losing out on resources to racial minorities mediated these effects. Among racial minorities, viewing a company statement that included Whites/European Americans or made no mention of diversity similarly increased recognition of unfair treatment of racial minorities, an effect mediated by minorities’ reduced feelings of inclusion (Experiment 2). Experiment 3 replicated these effects using a more subtle manipulation of the all-inclusive diversity statement. These studies suggest defining diversity as inclusive of Whites/European Americans increases Whites’ sensitivity to racial injustice against minorities but simultaneously increases racial minority Americans’ concerns about exclusion and unfair treatment.

A Changing Workforce

2020 ◽  
pp. 210-236
Author(s):  
Jennifer A. Delton
Keyword(s):  
African Americans ◽  
Affirmative Action ◽  
Civil Rights ◽  
Civil Rights Movement ◽  
Equal Opportunity ◽  
National Association ◽  
Historically White ◽  
Right To Work ◽  
Workplace Rights ◽  
National Association Of Manufacturers

This chapter examines the overlap between African Americans' demands for jobs and conservatives' push for “right to work” laws. While compulsory union dues were very different from unions' exclusion of blacks, both movements targeted historically white unions and shared a language of workplace “rights.” Conservative “right to work” activists adopted the tactics of the civil rights movement and aligned themselves with blacks against exclusionary unions. Although this strategy failed to attract African Americans, it called attention to unions' historic and ongoing racism in a way that eventually divided the labor–liberal coalition. This dynamic is key to understanding the National Association of Manufacturers' complicated support for civil rights, equal opportunity, and affirmative action.

A Review of the Literature on the Status of Women and Minorities in the Professoriate in Higher Education

1993 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 121-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marylyn W. Granger
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Black Women ◽  
Affirmative Action ◽  
Educational Administration ◽  
Equal Opportunity ◽  
Status Report ◽  
Women In Higher Education ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
The Status ◽  
Status Of Women

Over the past twenty years, the status of women in higher education has improved, but only marginally so. As the political and social climate of the country has become more conservative, the concepts of affirmative action and equal opportunity for women and minorities have been challenged more than ever. In addition, although women are flocking to graduate schools in record numbers, only a small percentage of them are encouraged to seek positions in higher education as administrators or professors. Statistically, the situation is worse, especially for black women. This status report focuses on the following: (1) the role of affirmative action in the hiring and retention of women in higher education; (2) the environment that exists in colleges and universities in regard to women and minorities; (3) policies that adversely affect black women in academia; (4) existing rank and salary inequities of minority male and female professors; (5) a specific look at male and female professors of educational administration; and (6) implications and recommendations.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document