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,...

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…