Re: State-Sponsored Racism
Posted:
Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:50 pm
by Stratego
What they're doing is counterproductive. If they really wanted to increase the employment for minorities, they should make it very difficult to fire a white man even if he f**k up really bad, while making it easier to fire a woman or a minority. Employers seeing how difficult it would be to fire a white man would view it as additional risk and would therefore hire a woman or a minority instead. The current system is just going to perpetuate the white preference.
Re: State-Sponsored Racism
Posted:
Thu Mar 21, 2013 1:48 pm
by Professor
The City of New Orleans mandates that, if subcontractors are used, at least 35% of every city-issued contract must be given to a member of a disadvantaged business enterprise (DBE). If you can't mee that 35%, you have to document that you attempted to meet it. DBEs certifications are given to business owners who are members of a "socially or economically disadvantaged class".
By definition, a socially disadvantaged individual is one who has been subjected to racial or ethnic prejudice or cultural bias because of his or her identity as a member of a group without regard to the person's individual qualities.
All that is directly from the city charter and supplimental websites.
http://new.nola.gov/nola/media/Economic ... e-v3-1.pdf
Re: State-Sponsored Racism
Posted:
Fri Mar 22, 2013 9:52 am
by Professor
I just can't understand how this is legal.
I'm remembering this from my business law classes, so I can't cite the exact passages. Under the Civil Rights act, to be considered a violation of that Act, a policy or action doesn't necessarily have to explicitely state that it discriminates against a protected class. If a policy has the effect of being discriminatory, it is still a violation.
For instance, saying that "all people" with incomes of less than $20k/yr must show an ID to vote would not be discriminatory on its face. But, it would disproportionately impact minorities. Therefore, it would have the effect of being discriminatory. Therefore, it's illegal.
Same thing here. "Discriminate" as a word does not mean anything bad or good. It simply means to use information to separate. Therefore, this policy (DBEs) is clearly discriminatory, because it helps minorities far more than anyone else.