Affirmative action in Libraries

It is possible that the ineffectiveness of affirmative action in libraries and elsewhere is bound up with the history of such programs and with public attitudes toward them. Americans have never been convinced that providing "preferential treatment" to certain classes of individuals is the proper way to remedy inequities in education and employment. In fact, the vast majority of Americans oppose the concept of affirmative action if it means setting aside jobs especially for women and members of minority groups. Nevertheless, the Courts, the Congress and, to varying extents, the Executive have all adopted affirmative action, in some form, as the best method for resolving the historical problems of discrimination in employment. Unfortunately, such programs have not worked any better in libraries than they have in other areas of society.

The purpose of affirmative action is to remedy the pro

. . .
pposes...," 1987, pp. 18-19). More recent Gallop polls have yielded similar results (Gallops Poll Report 143, p. 22). In spite of the attitude of the populace, the courts have handed down a number of decisions that have supported or refined affirmative action. Even where they have restricted the scope of affirmative action, they have seemed to accept the correctness of the principle of compensatory preferential treatment. In the Bakke case, for example, four of the five justices who struck down the University of California plan did not rule against it on constitutional grounds (Brooks, 1989, p. 612). A number of other cases are perceived as having "rolled back" affirmative action, but they are not perceived as having eliminated it. In Firefighters Local Union Number 1784 v. Stotts and Wygant v. Jackson Board of Education, for example, the Supreme Court disallowed the consideration of past "societal discrimination" in granting additional seniority to black teachers and firefighters as a way of protecting them from lay-offs (p. 614). The Court did not, however, state that adjustments to reduce racial imbalance are constitutionally invalid. It is noteworthy that in a number of cases the present Court, which is considered cons
. . .

Some common words found in the essay are:
III Affirmative, Supreme Court, David Dowell, Business Week, CONCLUSION Affirmative, Civil Rights, Courts Congress, Commission EEOC, INTRODUCTION Affirmative, Research Libraries, affirmative action, affirmative action programs, preferential treatment, action programs, librarians women, research libraries, supreme court, women minority, academic libraries, women libraries, action libraries, affirmative action libraries, commission civil rights, purpose affirmative action, majority americans oppose,
Approximate Word count = 4187
Approximate Pages = 17 (250 words per page)

More Essays on Affirmative action in Libraries