Reverse discrimination

Table of Contents

The first instances of reverse discrimination are dated in the year 1964. It referred to instances of discrimination in education, contracts, or employment in whites or males while favouring the racial groups known as underprivileged. The most affected in the United States are the Caucasians, Northern European American among other minorities. The Federal Equal employment opportunity laws ban any discrimination in the work place based on race, religion, colour, sex and national origin. Additionally, both men and female should not be discriminated on base of wage, or 40 years old and above, people with disabilities, and genetic information and many more. From my understanding of reverse discrimination in United States, the move is aimed at redressing discrimination that is being faced by a minority group being denied the right to use the same privileges as the dominant group. This is done with the intentions of promoting equality socially (Pincus, 2003). At one instance or the other there were disparities in income and resources spread economically. Such inequality is common among the society individuals or groups. It is also common among nations. For instance, a person may be equally highly qualified as another for the same job and because the company has to fill their quota for a specific race, a lesser qualified person may be chosen instead of the highly qualified one.

In the case of group discrimination, like the case of Santa Fe, New Mexico, the discrimination is by group. The Indians are highly regarded as the only people who can sell from within the Polar museum; this is because they are considered as the only persons who can create beautiful and manmade crafts and arts to attract tourism. A law has even been put in place to cater for the same. People from all other races have no right to sell from within the polar (Pincus, 2003). The main reason is to maintain the flow of tourism in the place since this is a source of income for the government. From the equal employment opportunity law, no male or female should be discriminated in the work place due to their race of social origin or even skin colour.According to the equal employment opportunities law, polices, and practices are reinforced by the Equal employment opportunity commission (EEOC). In the name of fulfilling these policies, companies may end up employing a person from a specific ethnic group purposely because there should be equal employment opportunities. For instance, a given company may be made up of employees who are mostly white, and since they want to appear to have been sensitive with equal employments, they employ a person from a given ethnic group or a person with disabilities (Pincus, 2003). This would be an instance of positive discrimination. This is not in accordance with the equal employments opportunities. Why because, the employments has just been made to satisfy the law. In so doing, the company is trying to avoid discrimination but in the real sense, there is discrimination. The law should specify percentages of employment opportunities that should comprise of whites and the percentage that should comprise of other ethic groups.In America today, getting a welfare is in itself a way of reverse discrimination, however, in order to obtain welfare as a white, one has to go with enough proof that they are poor and not able yet, for a black or Hispanic, welfare is provided as a matter of just presenting themselves. Additionally, a white entertainment TV is not available for the whites but the blacks have a black entertainment TV with only blacks and Hispanics get employed (Pincus, 2003). This in itself has helped eliminate racial discrimination yet there is reverse discrimination. The minority are being favoured at the expense of the whites just to fulfil the law. In other cases, males may face discrimination in the work place. They may not be employed while a female with equal or less employments qualifications may end up employed (Buckley, 2008). Since male and female should have equal employment opportunities, a company ought to have the female and not the male just to satisfy the law. The law on equal employment for male and female should not apply where the employment opportunity is specifically in need of a male (Pincus, 2003). It is a good thing since by fulfilling it companies try not to discriminate but in the real sense, there is discrimination available as in you discriminate the male. Just to fulfil the female quotas

A positive application of the equal employment opportunities is where the whites who are tend to just consider the other ethnic groups as lazy (Pincus, 2003). For instance, some employers put off the blacks by reasoning that they are lazy and stupid and that they just don’t work (Buckley, 2008). However, the truth is no employer considers them as equally qualified and employs them while leaving out the whites this appears as if the blacks are lazy. If one has not hired, they do not work and this doesn’t mean they are lazy. The laws on equal employment have contributed a great deal in eliminating this notion that considers the blacks as lazy. Instead, when provided with work they are equally competent. Affirmative action in itself is discriminatory to the same people it is designed to assist (Kowalski, 2006). Equality as advocated in the equal employment opportunities are promoted when a person is hired based on their colour of their skin or race (Buckley, 2008). What is not sure about is whether in satisfying the quota, the company ends up hiring the right person for the job in both handwork and qualifications at all times. This is because, some people mostly whites end up loosing on promotions, pay rises or the entire job opportunity just in the name of satisfying the quotas (Kowalski, 2006). The end result of reverse discrimination and equal employment is an overall negative reaction from the whites who feel as the majority in the American nation, they should be provided with majority of the jobs (Buckley, 2008). This is not just because of skin colour or ethnic group but because reverse discrimination only results to more hatred and racism. The whites have had the tendency to believe they belong to a higher class and have higher personal achievements to rule the United States. For a long time, the congress has had few representatives being blacks and only Martin Luther being a prudential aspirant who was black skinned. However, the minorities have taken the rule with president Barrack Obama being in rule today. However, there are instances where black people discriminate against their fellow blacks yet the term racial discrimination is only used to refer to a white doing things to the other ethnic groups. It is not all right.Though many whites are against it, my opinion is that reverse discrimination has gone a long way in promoting equality. Despite the few instances of the whites being discriminated, I believe racism and discrimination would still be a major problem for America to deal with till date (Buckley, 2008). However, the implementation of the reverse discrimination should have a time line leaving affirmative action to take control of workplace employments and college admissions.

Reference

Buckley, J., (2008). Guide to Equal Employment. Aspen Publishers. USA

Kowalski, K., (2006). Affirmative action. Marshall Cavendish Corporation. China

Pincus, F., (2003). Reverse discrimination. Rienner Publishers, Inc. Colorado: USA

Is this your assignment or some part of it?

We can do it for you! Click to Order!