Set-aside and inclusion programs for black women in male-dominated industries

Black Women in Male Industries --

Black Women in White Male Dominant Industries:

Are Set-Aside and Inclusion Programs Really Assisting?

Martin and Barnard (2013) state that those women working in areas that are male-dominated have different problems from those in female-dominated areas and those balanced in gender. The problems are as result of customs of inequality in gender, and the values within families and the community. The male gender is still considered senior to the female gender in families, and traditionally, in spite of the efforts made to empower females and to bring about equality in gender. The traditional beliefs on gender roles are also in company rules and practices. Women are given degraded tasks and are subjected to an organizational culture with gender discrimination.

According to the American Association for Access, Equity and Diversity (2015) it has been more than half a century since the U.S. began to fight for equality, both as a result and as a freedom. It has been quite successful as seen in the large number of people of color and females in the government, Academy and the private sector. It has, however, also had a number of problems, both legal and rhetorical, which increase in some presidential administrations and fade in some. These issues, among others, were the reason for affirmative action.

Set-Aside and Inclusion Programs

According to Kranjc (1990), the set-aside programs for minorities are an affirmative action strategy that is contentious. Set-asides had been introduced by a number of governmental agencies to help eliminate the results of previous acts of bias in the process of government contracting.

The government has a great chance for promoting equality in economic opportunities, and for prevention of marketplace bias, through procurement. The state, local and federal governments in the country have, in the past few decades, come up with programs meant to increase the value and number of contracts by the government, which are given to women-owned business enterprises and MBEs ( Minority-owned business enterprises) (Office of the State Comptroller, 2010).

There have been many programs developed through the whole federal government, meant to increase contracts with women and minority-owned business enterprises, along with procurement. The greatest among these initiatives, are the programs used throughout the government under the supervision of SBA (Small Business Administration). At times, agency-specific measures are used to assist those programs. Under these whole programs, a number of contracts for procurement are preserved for the purpose of sheltered or sole-source or sheltered rivalry contracting, whose eligibility is meant for minority-owned businesses, or women-owned business that are non-minority. It is however more widely availed by parliament, to the economically and socially unprivileged. In addition, there is a wide, sheltered, racially unbiased competition or generally set-aside for little businesses. This is distinct and less considered than those initiatives that are targeted more. However, we still have more than 93% of procurement with those companies that are non-minority (White House, 1999).

According to Chatterji, Chay and Fairlie (2013), from the early 70s, there are hundreds of billion dollars which have been used on programs to set aside or create percentage goals for contracts by government, for subcontractors or companies owned by the minority. There are $28.2 billion contracts of federal procurement which were given to the less privileged to businesses in 2008 only. This makes 6.3% of the overall value of all the awarded federal contracts. The total amount that was used on contracting programs for affirmative action, for those companies owned by the minority dwarfs that amount used on implementing affirmative action on work places and those acts against discrimination by the central government, such as The Civil Rights Act and Executive Order 11246 of 1964 (Title VII). There was a considerable growth rate, especially in the 1980's, in the cost of contracts for city governments that were meant for MBEs. It was said that the set-aside programs were meant for establishment of minority-owned businesses, correct the consequences of previous bias and lower the high level of unemployment among the urban minorities in the 80s.

Small businesses create the most opportunities for technical innovation and employment in the U.S. Therefore, the president and Congress have expressed much interest in motivating the health and development of small enterprises through the whole American economy. Among the simplest methods for the government to nurture and motivate small enterprises is the use of federal contracts. According to the 1953 Small Business Act, small enterprises need to get an equitable share of contracts by the federal government, and that those small enterprises must possess the most possible practical opportunity for participation in contracting with the central government (McVay, 2009).

Furthermore, McVay (2009) states that the set-aside for small enterprises is the highest used socioeconomic program. It "sets aside," or regulates contracts that are specifically meant for participating in small businesses. The only enterprises that are said to be small are those which do not go beyond the recommended size limit for the acquired service or supply. They are the only ones allowed to propose or bid on set-asides for small businesses. Those offerors or bidders who go beyond the allowed size limit for some set-aside for a small business are described as nonresponsive. They proposals or bids are not approved.

There were other programs developed to increase the reach to economic opportunities for the minority, disadvantaged and women-owned businesses. The programs include Veterans Business Program, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) Program and Business Enterprise Program (BEP) (Tollway, 2016).

The program for DBE is meant to correct present or past prejudice against DBEs, create a level ground and give fair opportunity in contracts that are DOT-assisted, ease the burden on small enterprises and improve the efficiency and elasticity of the program. The program was initially for women and minority owned businesses, developed by the law, under the command of the 1964 Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI) along with other acts against discrimination which are applicable by the DOT (Department of Transportation) programs for financial assistance (U.S. Department of Transportation, 2014).

National Trends

The programs for MWBE have made initiatives at the local, state and federal levels, women and minorities. However, there is still discrimination at work and in the market, mostly for black women. Women and minorities earn considerably lower income, whether self-employed or employed, than the non-minority men. Minority-owned companies throughout the country make 17% of the overall nationwide businesses. However, they earn lower than 3% of the overall receipts and sales. A similar case applies to women. Women throughout the country make 28% of businesses, but only earn 4% of the total receipts and sales. Other studies show that women and minority-owned businesses earn less than what they deserve, from public contracting. Minority-owned companies earned way less dollars from government contracts than expected considering their availability. Actually, MBEs, as a whole, earned only 57% of what they would expect to earn from contracts with the government, considering their availability and numbers (Office of the State Comptroller, 2010).

Conclusion

It is the opinion of the Pennsylvania Advisory Committee (2002) that M/WBEs are still way below majority-owned companies which are given public contracts. Municipal and state officials need to come up with and execute accurate tools for contract reporting which still monitor payments and commitments to M/WBEs. They need to gather more comprehensive data for numerically comparing the firms owned by the nonminority that receive contracts with M/WBEs, and determining if it is proportionate to their numbers in all industries. Furthermore, offices of the state in the office of the governor must annually report together, to the General Assembly and the governor about the industry contracting to non-minority companies, enterprise zone companies and M/WBEs. The report must give in detail, the steps taken to improve participation in M/WBE, the staffing requirements by the agency, examinations of bias in contracting along with challenges faced by M/WBEs.