Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version nyu B notes v1.5 12/10/84; site acf4.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!cmcl2!acf4!mms1646 From: mms1646@acf4.UUCP (Michael M. Sykora) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Discrimination and AA Message-ID: <1340257@acf4.UUCP> Date: Thu, 4-Jul-85 02:10:00 EDT Article-I.D.: acf4.1340257 Posted: Thu Jul 4 02:10:00 1985 Date-Received: Fri, 5-Jul-85 06:32:24 EDT References: <520@ttidcc.UUCP> Organization: New York University Lines: 35 >/* regard@ttidcc.UUCP (Adrienne Regard) / 2:57 pm Jul 2, 1985 */ >(1) I'm not defending quotas on the grounds that they don't make a >difference anyway. I am saying that quotas do not, of themselves, cause >poorly prepared people to be hired into work situations. "Poorly" here is a matter of judgement. In order for quotas not to cause those who are less than the best available applicants to be hired over such the best qualified ones, the ratio of minority to non-minority applicants in the pool would have to be exactly as those in the quotas, for all jobs that quotas are applied to. The odds against this are astronomical. (Yes, I hate that word too, but it seemed appropriate. :-) >Quotas provide a (imperfect) >measure, which is better than none. They also provided a basis for law >suits. Yes, and one of the imperfections is that they force employers to discriminate against people in employment on the basis of sex and race. All employers are forced to do so, regardless of whether or not they discriminated in the past. >Put another way: skills or no, I believe that neither the >handicapped nor the females, nor the blacks nor the other minorities would >be working in traditionally white-male bastions if it were not for EEO >_and_ AA. Further, I believe that these people would not have had the >opportunity to acquire the skills. Why do you believe this? >Adrienne Regard Mike Sykora