Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site mtung.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxt!houxm!vax135!ariel!mtunf!mtung!jdh
From: jdh@mtung.UUCP (Julia Harper)
Newsgroups: net.politics,net.social,net.women,net.flame
Subject: Re: Discrimination and Affirmative Action
Message-ID: <569@mtung.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 31-May-85 12:58:41 EDT
Article-I.D.: mtung.569
Posted: Fri May 31 12:58:41 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 8-Jun-85 03:40:16 EDT
References: <566@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>, <478@hou2g.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Information Systems Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ
Lines: 24
Xref: watmath net.politics:9301 net.social:612 net.women:5609 net.flame:10362

()
Please note:

1. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY = a fair shot.

2.  AFFIRMITIVE ACTION exists to counteract the LACK
OF EQUAL OPPORTUNITY.  There is no way to force unfair 
employers to practice EQUAL OPPORTUNITY.  AFFIRMITIVE 
ACTION puts a quota on the employer to force at least
some semblance of EQUAL OPPORTUNITY.  

By the way, just because there are minimum quotas for
disadvantaged groups doesn't mean that equal opportunity
is achieved for these groups.  It is possible (and likely) 
that unfair employers never hire more than the quota for 
a group, WHETHER OR NOT they should hire more on the
basis of EQUAL OPPORTUNITY.

Another thought:  perhaps AFFIRMATIVE ACTION should start
at a lower level -- like in schools, not just jobs.

-- 
Julia Harper
[ihnp4,ariel]!mtung!jdh