Anti Discrimination Policy

The query of whether organizations should utilize affirmative action plans to hire individuals is critical, because equal hiring practices require affirmative action plans. In this paper, I argue that within the current public perceptions or misinterpretations of affirmative action, and the question of what should be considered equal hiring policies, there is no simple answer to this controversial issue. Due to weaknesses of the arguments against affirmative action plans, I will argue for the necessity of fixed, specific guidelines to execute the anti-discrimination policy, in order to avoid clashes on how the policy should be implemented.
Before I begin, I need to define what I mean when I reference these terms. An organization will be regarded as a corporate environment which seeks to hire individuals on the basis of knowledge , experience and merit for a position without taking into consideration their skin color, race or sexual orientation, marital status , or serving status. …show more content…
Whether an organization shall be regarded as an equal employer depends on the basis of their hiring policies and how they implement them without violating the rights of employees or potential job candidates. Discrimination is discussed here as deprivation of employment and job promotion on the basis of race, color, sexual orientation, status and gender. Affirmative action is referenced as a policy designed to improve historical injustices against women, ethnic minorities and other disadvantaged groups which has supported racial minorities in gaining access to valuable resources including job promotion and educational opportunities.
There are three reasons to believe that organizations should consider the use of specific guidelines to execute the anti-discrimination policy, in order to avoid clashes on how the policy should be implemented. Firstly, affirmative action is effective in increasing diversity in the workplace and its benefits override the imperfections associated with it. Affirmative action allows for more individuals to join professional organizations that they otherwise would not have been able to join due to ethnic barriers or due to a lack of diversity in that professional organization. Morally speaking diversity is favorable because it allows organizations to receive different perspectives from a variety of professionals, not just from one social group. Without allowing different perspectives organizations are at a disadvantage because including people from only one social group, tends to favor the same outcomes. The same opinions from one social group do not always provide the best outcomes because people of different social groups will provide a broader range of perspectives due to ethnic backgrounds and experiences different from the prominent social group in the workplace. Secondly, sex and race are taken under consideration without regarding whether affirmative action plans exist or not. Individuals of a specific race or gender that are discriminated against are judged based on those characteristics and that determines whether they receive the promotion or the employment opportunity. This kind of judgment leaves out their merits or qualifications for the job hence, leaving the impression that they are still being discriminated against. Third, placing labels on minorities serves to highlight the achievement of these individuals in the relation to cultural strengths. It is nearly impossible to avoid placing labels on people when trying to bring about some plans which allows them to advance their position in society hence, when seeking promotions or employment in an organization. However, these contentions can be effectively challenged. One objection holds that affirmative action harms its beneficiaries by giving