Affirmative Action Plan in Human Resources

Affirmative Action Plan It is a fact that there has been discrimination in employment, where minorities, women, veterans and the disabled are sidelined in favor of the rest of the population. This ought to be provided with equitable access to employment opportunities and this is exactly what affirmative action plan does.

By statistical analyses of the demographics, affirmative action programs are able to do away with the negative effects of employment discrimination, in an inclusive manner and without regard to gender, race and disabilities (HRUnlimited, 2018) Affirmative action is a major concern for many employees. The laws of affirmative action affect all federal government workers, as well as private medium sized to large scale enterprises. Students in institutions of higher education (averaging about 16 million in the U.S.) are also affected by affirmative action laws.

Citizens are normally left debating whether affirmative action policies are fair. The US openly claims how fair it is in all its employment deals, but the history proves otherwise. The government has not all along been fair to all individuals, regardless of their gender or ethnicity. Therefore, any law that points to disparity will more than often spark heated debates. The media plays a great role in disseminating information related to affirmative action (Golden, Hinkle & Crosby, 2001).

Confusion regarding what exactly affirmative action is has been witnessed over the past few decades. The proponents and opponents of affirmative action have not been seeing eye to eye. It seems each and every person has differing views on affirmative action. Come to the citizens, many are the ones who know nothing about the basic principles nor the technical mechanics of affirmative action.

A recent survey on Chicago citizens showed that 40% of them had this strange idea that affirmative is some kind of a quota system, and these disliked the policy. About half of the sampled population though it to be some kind of monitoring system and so they were for it. Such differences in perception and endorsement have lingered on for decades (Golden, Hinkle & Crosby, 2001). Despite the numerous Americans affected by affirmative action, the policy is not well explained in high school and college syllabus.

It is no wander that many graduates cannot comfortably define affirmative action. 1995 was the year when the then president of the US, Bill Clinton, publicly performed an evaluation of affirmative action. After that, the scholars in the nation did a count of the articles on that topic published in the mainstream media, namely The Washington Post, USA Today and The New York Times. This was done over a period of three months: June, July and August. Of the total 176 counted, less than 10 of the articles clearly defined affirmative action.

It seems the authors were reporting on a topic they didn’t have a good depth of knowledge about (Crosby & Cordova, 1996). The need for affirmative action Considering costs, affirmative action is on the higher side compared to equal opportunity. Affirmative action has been known to breed criticism like no other policy. This has a negative effect on those it should benefit, simply because of the numerous questions on its merits. Those individuals who cannot be classed as minorities do not see the benefit of affirmative action.

On the other hand, those who place themselves in the minority group endorse affirmative action with all their might (Crosby & Konrad, 2002). So, the question remains: Is affirmative action really necessary? Of what use is a policy that greatly burdens organizations in the name of assuring fairness? Being a proactive policy, how will you ever convince an organization to abandon the less costly reactive policies? Social psychologists have the best answers to these questions.

A team of psychologists back in the year 1982 came up with this theory referred to as “the denial of personal discrimination”. This is where an individual, distances himself, from the discrimination that other people in his social group face. Take for instance colored people within a dominantly white locality. Most of the blacks may fear and actually experience discrimination when it comes to searching for jobs, or even accessing vital facilities such as health care facilities.

Despite all this, you may find that one colored person who rides above his racial orientation, believes in himself and accesses anything he wants, just like the whites would do. Such a person is said to have denied his personal discrimination. Research has also shown that the discriminated fellows have that ability to accept their status and try what they can to minimize discrimination. Western Europeans and North Americans do not find appropriate the policies that require discriminated persons to explain themselves (Day, 2001).

An average person would normally put in all efforts he can to ensure he is not discriminated against. And when they realize someone has taken advantage of them, they cannot help but boil in anger. Take the example of a colored woman who has all along denied any likelihood of being at a disadvantage because of her race or gender. When an epiphany comes her way, she will definitely end up enraged. Such explosive anger will greatly cost the concerned organization.

A typical organization operates at its optimum when all that happens within its ranks is predictable. An enraged employee may go to the extent of suing the company, for which the company risks losing money in form of hefty fines. Statistics have it that organizations lose anything between $100,000 and 1 million dollars when sued for discrimination (Bergmann, 1996). Who needs an Affirmative Action Plan? Virtually all employers should adhere to Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) laws.

However, it is a requirement that the following companies have a documented Affirmative Action Plan: - Federal contractors and subcontractors with over 50 employees - Companies with contracts worth over $50,000 - Companies handling contracts with government bills of lading totaling over $50,000 for any 1-year period.

- Companies where the government deposits funds - Financial institutions acting as agents for US savings bonds (HRUnlimited, 2018) Every employer that fits within the above listed companies ought to adhere to the provisions of the Executive Order 11246, as well as Title 41 of the Code of Federal regulations 60-4. The affirmative action obligations for construction contractors are comprehensively described in the Standard Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Construction Contract Specifications. These are aimed to assure the worker that all processes within the organization are in good faith, without any form whatsoever of discrimination.

Here’s a brief outline of these specifications: 1. The company should create a conducive work environment devoid of harassment, coercion and intimidation of any manner. Any given construction project should have two or more women attached to it. The company is also tasked with ensuring its employees on site know what the company’s obligations are. 2. The company should keep an updated list of recruitment sources for the minority and women.

Whenever an opportunity arises within the company, the recruitment sources should be informed in good time so that they can advise their members how to apply for the forthcoming jobs. 3. In case a minority or female candidate applies for a job, the company should maintain their files, with entries such as names, telephone numbers, addresses, etc. The applicant may also have been referred by a recruitment source. The company should also pen down what action was taken to assist the applicant.

Reasons why he/she was not hired should also be documented. All official communication between the applicant and the company should also be recorded. 4. The company should immediately inform the Union Directors in writing in the case that the union affiliated to the contractor fails to forward the name of a minority person, or when the union deliberately impedes the contractor from meetings its obligations. 5. The company should offer on-the-job training opportunities for the minorities and women, for example apprenticeships, trainee programs related to construction and upgrading programs.

The company should specifically endorse those programs endorsed by the Department of Labor. 6. The company’s documented EEO policy should be forwarded to the unions and training programs for perusal. These unions should assist the contractor to meet its objectives. The EEO policy should likewise be included in every collective bargain agreement and manual. It would also be good to publicize the EEO policy in the company newspaper and annual reports. The company should also review the policy annually in the presence of the managers and the minority groups. 7.

The company should once in a year sit down with all the employees assigned the role of hiring and layoff, and review the company’s Affirmative Action Plan and the EEO policy. The supervisory personnel on site should also take part in this review. The review meeting should be well recorded, including details such as time, place, attendees and the agenda. 8. The company should advertise its EEO policy externally through print media, especially those focused on minority groups and women.

The company should also consider discussing the EEO policy with other company for which they don’t expect to get into business with. 9. The company’s recruitment efforts should be more focused on the minority groups and women. These can be found in schools and other training organizations within the area of jurisdiction of the contractor. The company should write to these institutions at least 1 month before the submission of applications.

Among other things, the director shall describe in details the job vacancy, screening process and the criteria for selection 10. It is also the role of the contractor to encourage the minority employees to source for more minority employees. This can be extended to after-school or summer employment. 11. Section 41 CFR part 60-3 requires the contractor to regularly prove the validity of all tests and other selection requirements. 12. Every year, the contractor should take inventory of the minority and female employees and evaluate them for possible promotion.

These employees should also be encouraged to enroll for appropriate training classes so as be ready for promotion. 13. The company should monitor all its employees on a regular basis, as well as the activities they engage in, so as to ascertain that the EEO policy is being followed. 14. The company should design its facilities in such a manner that anyone can access. There should be nothing like washrooms for the whites and others for the colored. An exception is the single-user toilet and changing facilities. 15.

The company should keep a detailed record of all the offers they get from other contractors, including circulars to the minority groups 16. The supervisors within the contractor’s firm should be interviewed at least once a year just to check whether they adhere to the provisions of the EEO policy. Affirmative Action Plan to a University in Indianapolis The University in Indianapolis is one of the few committed to equal opportunities for all its employees.

This Affirmative Action Plan seeks to outline the policies that the University will employ to realize equality for all people, especially in the process of hiring and promotion of staff. The top leaders in the university, vice chancellors, directors and deans are directly responsible for the general equity practices in the school. The employees themselves should be conscious of the University’s policy on Affirmative Action and comply as necessary.

The supervisors should take the affirmative action policies with the seriousness it deserves and act in good faith for purposes of equality (IPFW, 2015). Purpose The campus gets federal contracts time after time, and so it is a requirement that it documents a comprehensive affirmative action program. As earlier defined, an affirmative action program is a very valuable tool in ensuring equal employment opportunities for all persons, notwithstanding their gender or race.

The program must ensure that all qualified applicants for a given vacancy are presented with an equal opportunity for hiring and placement. The development of the policy starts with an assessment of the present employees so as to deduce whether some of them are under-utilized. In case some form of under-utilization is witnessed, it is upon the university to mobilize all efforts to come up with procedures that address such discrepancies.

The hiring goals should be clearly defined so that the women and minorities can be fitted somewhere within the institution. A good affirmative action program will also detail the monitoring and evaluation procedures for the employees. These procedures should be non-biased and should be favorable to all persons, regardless of their color, race, disability, sex, religion, age, ancestry, veteran status or national origin (IPFW, 2015). The Affirmative Action Programme actually confirms beyond doubt the commitment of the University to the Affirmative Action principles.

It additionally functions as a document for reporting the actions of students and staff, as well as a means of communicating issues related to the formation of the plan. (IPFW, 2015) Definitions Discrimination can be safely defined as the process of scrupulously judging people because of the minority group they belong to, while ignoring whatever qualifications the person may have. Systemic discrimination is the perpetuation of discriminatory practices characteristic of a given institution. On the other hand, individual discrimination involves mostly personnel of higher rank.