2 ms·

> However, companies that have diversity goals have not been found to be discriminatory as it’s been argued that the diversity goals create a multicultural envi

by MikeUt 5y ago

> However, companies that have diversity goals have not been found to be discriminatory as it’s been argued that the diversity goals create a multicultural environment that benefits the business. Is there an "it's okay if it benefits the business" clause in US anti-discrimination law? If so, could one find a few studies that highlight the ills of diversity [1,2,3], and use them to argue they're allowed to discriminate to achieve an ethnically homogeneous workplace? [1] A Harvard political scientist finds that diversity hurts civic life. - http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/the_downside_of_diversity/ http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/05/t... [2] Living in Ethnically Homogenous Area Boosts Health of Minority Seniors - https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news/living-ethnically-homogenous-area-boosts-health-minority-seniors https://www.publichealth.columbia.edu/public-health-now/news... [3] Our analysis shows that peace does not depend on integrated coexistence, but rather on well defined topographical and political boundaries separating groups - http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0095660 http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjourna...

twobitshifter 5y ago
You could try but I don’t think it’s the best argument since you’ll find equal or more research saying the opposite and courts don’t arbitrate business decisions in that way. There’s the lawsuit against Harvard that’s unfolding now to try to strike down such policies, they’re using Asian Americans as the minority that is being harmed by the admittance process. When this has been brought before the Supreme Court before they’ve sided with business and colleges by arguing the process is a holistic review rather than being a decision made on one criteria. The most recent Supreme Court decision is here. Affirmative action may allude to a critical mass of diversity but this cannot be defined in quantities or percentage. Applications cannot be scored on race, it can only be part of a holistic review. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_v._University_of_Texas_(2013) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_v._University_of_Texa... For Harvard, they use a personality scoring metric, but the Asian Americans have argued that this metric disproportionately disadvantaged Asians. Personally - my thinking is that meritocracy is a flawed model that leads to stratification of society. Knowing that life is largely a deterministic process, I can’t say that the best way to run things is to let those with the luckiest genetics, inherited wealth, or connections continue to be rewarded over those that are less fortunate. The underlying factors do need to be dealt with somehow. We’re focused on race, but that’s one of many things out of your control that affect your future.

by MikeUt 5y ago

twobitshifter 5y ago

You could try but I don’t think it’s the best argument since you’ll find equal or more research saying the opposite and courts don’t arbitrate business decisions in that way. There’s the lawsuit against Harvard that’s unfolding now to try to strike down such policies, they’re using Asian Americans as the minority that is being harmed by the admittance process. When this has been brought before the Supreme Court before they’ve sided with business and colleges by arguing the process is a holistic review rather than being a decision made on one criteria. The most recent Supreme Court decision is here. Affirmative action may allude to a critical mass of diversity but this cannot be defined in quantities or percentage. Applications cannot be scored on race, it can only be part of a holistic review. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_v._University_of_Texas_(2013) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fisher_v._University_of_Texa... For Harvard, they use a personality scoring metric, but the Asian Americans have argued that this metric disproportionately disadvantaged Asians. Personally - my thinking is that meritocracy is a flawed model that leads to stratification of society. Knowing that life is largely a deterministic process, I can’t say that the best way to run things is to let those with the luckiest genetics, inherited wealth, or connections continue to be rewarded over those that are less fortunate. The underlying factors do need to be dealt with somehow. We’re focused on race, but that’s one of many things out of your control that affect your future.