Myth #4 - Title VIII alone is sufficient to
address discrimination.
Reality: Affirmative action means taking
positive, pro-active and preemptive steps to root
out discrimination, rather than waiting for
after-the-fact litigation. Title VII is enough to
address discrimination, but it will do so only after
an instance of discrimination has been claimed.
Affirmative action policies are a means to end
discrimination in a far less costly and disruptive
way than protracted litigation.
Myth#5 - Unqualified individuals are being
hired and promoted for the sake of
diversity/affirmative action.
Reality: Only affirmative action plans that
do not compromise valid job or educational
qualifications are lawful. They must be flexible,
realistic, reviewable and fair. The Supreme Court
has found that there are at least two permissible
bases for voluntary affirmative action by employers
under Title VII: (1) to remedy a clear and
convincing history of past discrimination by the
employer or union, and (2) to cure a manifest
imbalance in the employer's work force. No doubt
there are instances where poor management practices
may have resulted in the hiring of unqualified
people; however, these are examples of error and/or
abuse of affirmative action that should be
considered by the President's review and corrected
by additional management training and public
education. They do not indict affirmative action
itself as a tool for achieving equality of
opportunity for all..
Myth #6 - The federal government should not
promote affirmative action through government
contracts.
Reality: Enactment of the 1964 Civil Rights
Act created an obligation of the federal government
to enforce the principle of equal opportunity in
employment embodied in the Title VII. One of the
enforcement strategies employed by the federal
government is to place conditions upon contracts
awarded by the federal government involving the
expenditure of federal funds. These funds come from
taxes paid by women and minorities who are entitled
to a fair portion of federal contracts. The original
Executive Order and Subsequent executive orders
requiring affirmative action in federal contracts
awards have been bipartisan support from the U.S.
Presidents and members of Congress, and from leaders
in the business community because they have been a
reasonable and effective way to enforce the law.