Affirmative Action
The belief by Boots and Scoots that its affirmative action plan isvoluntary is inaccurate. Also, the clause in the company's affirmativeaction plan, "Upon the day that the percentage of each group (defined by aprotected trait) within the company equals the percentage of each suchgroup in the available labor pool the affirmative action plan shall endexactly three years from that day" presents several legal concernsregarding affirmative action compliance, most notably the introduction of apossible quota issue and lack of continues compliance. Boots and Scootsshould consider an update to its affirmative plan regardless of whether ornot it continues to conduct business with the federal government.Otherwise, it could be subjected to agency reviews, court proceedings and All covered employers of companies doing business with the federalgovernment are required to adopt a formal affirmative action program,documented by a written affirmative action plan. Affirmative actionregulations apply to any company that has a contract with the United Statesof $50,000 or more. Thus, Boots & Scoots federal contract of more than$50,000 to extinguish oil well fires in Iraq means that it must m
[6] Doing businesswith the federal government is the only action that can lead to therequirement to develop an affirmative action plan and program. Although Boots and Scoots would not have to develop an affirmativeaction plan if it did not have contracts with the federal government, thisactivity would still be a good way to ensure compliance with Title VII ofthe Civil Rights Act. Secondly, the company needs to reword its mention of percentages so thatthey are presented as objectives rather than quotas, qualified by good-faith search efforts. In addition, the OFCCP would be unlikely toaccept in quantification of time periods for compliance with affirmativeaction; it is expected to be an ongoing process with yearly workforceplanning and analysis. Bakke case settled in 1978, the Supreme Courtruled that race could be one of the factors considered in choosing adiverse student body in university admissions decisions. [4] Therefore, the OFCCP expects a plan spanning the durationof a single year, not three. A company incurs no legal penalty if it makes a good-faith searchbut still cannot meet its goals. The EEOC has the authority to investigate andconciliate charges of discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex,or national origin by employers, unions, employment agencies, and jointapprenticeship or training committees. And, the companywould have more flexibility in the scope that is plan must cover. If a company fails to meet its goal, thegoal is re-established the next year -- and the next and the next, as longas the company fails to find qualified people. [2] Affirmative action is a system of goals rather than a more restrictivequota. First, it needs to view the plan as arequirement by the federal government due to its present contract status. Boots and Scoots would still need to eliminate itswording that suggests quotas, but could have more latitude in thequantification of time period covered by its proposal. [3] The wording in Boots and Scoot's affirmative action plan, "theaffirmative action plan shall end exactly three years from that day", islikely to be viewed negatively by the federal Office of Contract CompliancePrograms (OFCCP). eet allfederal affirmative action requirements.
Common topics in this essay:
Boots Scoots,
California Bakke,
Programs OFCCP,
Assistance Act,
Rights Act,
affirmative action,
Title VII,
EEOC EEOC,
Supreme Court,
Rehabilitation Act,
Boots Scoot's,
action plan,
affirmative action plan,
boots scoots,
federal government,
business federal,
business federal government,
doing business,
civil rights act,
civil rights,
rights act,
doing business federal,
title vii,
plan affirmative,
action plan affirmative,
|
Acceptance Essays
