Business Ethics - Discrimination Essay Example for Free

Business Ethics Discrimination Essay Discrimination is defined as distinguishing something from something else (i. e. don’t hire him because he has no experience). Unjustified discrimination is distinguishing something from something else on a basis that is not justified (i. e. don’t hire him because he is black). The term discrimination commonly replaces the term unjustified discrimination in business, philosophy, psychology and day-to-day community life. In a just and fair society, such as we Canadians aspire to, a job applicant’s race, ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age, orientation, mental ability, or physical condition should not disadvantage them in career choices or job competitions. If a short Asian female firefighter can do the job, she should get the job. Conversely she should not expect to receive concessions that are not available to all; that is in effect also discrimination. Unfortunately, discrimination often arises in business in regards to hiring, job placement, wage, and promotion. Affirmative Action Ideally, discrimination should be of no concern at all; everyone should have an equal opportunity to anything. In a perfect world a hiring manager would not have to think thoughts such as, â€Å"They are disabled, they are women, they are aboriginal,† and would only think, â€Å"This person will be perfect for the job because†¦. † Unfortunately this may never completely happen. For example if a person in a wheelchair applies to be a stock person at Costco and another person who is not in a wheelchair applies for the same position the manager will be debating, â€Å"Should I hire the person who cannot walk because I want to be socially responsible? Or should I hire the person who can walk, who will probably do a better job and who I won’t have to make special accommodations for? † Another example is a man and a woman who are applying to be a nurse on the obstetrics ward; they have both just graduated and have exactly the same experience. If only one position is available who is more likely to be hired? Affirmative action programs often come into place to encourage equal opportunity. Affirmative action refers to policies or rograms that take factors such as; age, sex, race, color or religion and give preferential treatment to people that belong to an identifiable disadvantaged group, or outgroup. Cons Reverse discrimination occurs when preferential treatment is given to one person and the other is left out. For example if a woman is hired to work in an oil patch just because she is a woman and man is not hired (perhaps only because of quota requirements), he will experience reverse discrimination. This may in fact v iolate a province’s human rights code. Some would also argue that it is wrong to place at a disadvantage a current day job applicant in order to attempt to compensate for historical wrong treatment of certain categories of job applicants. Merit may not exist if affirmative action is in place. A situation could arise where an applicant may deserve a job more because he or she has more education and more experience than the hired applicant who is disabled, if the hiring was done only in the interest of a representative workplace. May condescend or offend outgroups because the people belonging to that group don’t believe they need preferential treatment in order to succeed. Affirmative action creates a perception that all racial minorities or physically disabled persons have low self image, poor job marketing skills, missed opportunities, and are in need government regulated assistance. Efficiency may be compromised if a company is forced to hirer a proportionally representative workforce. Instead of hiring the best fitting candidate, companies would be forced to seek out a visible minority or a disabled candidate. This simply is not good business practice. A company should be free to hire the best candidate. Morale and workplace cooperation may be negatively impacted by a person being hired because of affirmative action policies which clearly give special considerations not available to all. The outgroup may develop a sense of entitlement that is not supported by the majority of the workers. Affirmative action may cause a widening of the gap (and an affirmation of bigotry) instead of a diverse and inclusive work force. For example, a white man at a steel factory may think that he got his job because he is qualified for it while being angry that the Asian man only got hired because there were no other Asians working in the plant and the hiring manager did not want to be discriminating. Pros Assistance in obtaining a desired job may be necessary for members of an identifiable disadvantaged group, or outgroup, since discrimination may make it difficult to establish a career. For example, men can be excellent nurses, but if a female hiring officer doesn’t understand or embrace the benefits of diversity, the obstetrics ward would have all female nurses. Another example might be a hair dressing trainee who is in a wheelchair; this applicant may have more obstacles to overcome and more convincing to do with a prospective employer. It is not fair, or just, that these applicants would have to be much better that the â€Å"normal† kind of applicant in order to be desirable to the employer. This â€Å"assistance† is given in affirmative action plans such as requiring employers to choose the disadvantaged applicant when all other skills are equal. Affirmative action makes working in different areas more desirable. Ex, Okanagan College has free introductory welding courses for women only. If colleges did not have these affirmative action programs there would probably be less female welders. This creates an incentive for a member of an outgroup to step forward and be part of the creation of workplace diversity. Affirmative action ensures justice for those who have historically been oppressed. Although hopefully not in Canada, there may still be a stigma attached to those whose ancestors were slaves, lower class, or aboriginal and thus seen as lesser that those with good career jobs. Some people may believe that affirmative action is necessary to change the attitudes of society by mandating a diverse work force. Canada cannot ignore the fact that a few generations ago a person with mental challenges or physical disabilities would not have been offered a position if there was a reasonable candidate who was considered â€Å"normal. † Affirmative action envisions a just work place where everyone is normal because the new normal is diverse and inclusive. Affirmative action encourages a representative work force. If 2% of the community’s population is visually impaired, then in a company of 100 employees, there should be a least two people who have some kind of sight impairment. In Canada, 3% of the population is aboriginal; therefore, there should be three members of a First Nation employed at the above company. A disabled person aged 25 to 44 accounts for 8% of the population. Statistically speaking, the above company, if it were in British Columbia, should have 27 employees who are recent immigrants. With roughly 60% of Canada’s population being Caucasian, all the numbers above would create a representative work force. It could be described as a diverse, dynamic, and exciting place to work; but does it exist? By requiring the inclusion of a representative work force affirmative action will in the long term change attitudes and encourage diversity. Thesis Affirmative action programs are still necessary to ensure equal opportunities in the work place and to encourage diversity, which over time will extinguish discrimination and contribute to a just, fair, and tolerant society. History I believe discrimination stems from history. If a young person learned from parents, schools, or media that women are not good trade workers, they will continue this discrimination for generations. This is what happens in all forms of discrimination because discrimination is learned. Discrimination can be reduced in a society with the influence of laws, education, and incentives. Affirmative action mandates exposure, which with encouragement by supportive government and ethical businesses will result in workplace diversity, and that over time will influence the thinking of society as a whole. Further Discussion: Continue Affirmative Action Dimock and Tucker thoroughly discussed their views on affirmative action policies about how such policies cause problems for employment equity in Canada. Dimock and Tucker did not discuss why such policies may still be necessary and did not thoroughly discuss a solution to discrimination. Their conclusion, while pointing out that affirmative action programs have not met intended goals, does not offer concrete solutions other than education. I disagree that the young should be the only target to ensure against discrimination. Youth can be racist, sexist, and exclusive. That’s why our society has a large problem with bullying. If discrimination is a learned trait, then the youth are learning it from above, and that is precisely the target of affirmative action. I believe affirmative action should still be used to some extent in order to encourage diversification. I think a combination of education and the experience of exposure is more useful that a single target group (such as educating the young). If groups (young, school aged, post secondary, and the work force) are created with diverse and representative participants, the likelihood of all groups beginning to like each other because of repeated exposure is much higher then if they remain separated. Well informed members of society who have personal experience with diversity are the least discriminating for several reasons: †¢They have been educated not be discriminating (from classes like this). †¢They have been put together in groups with all different types of people, and †¢They have become comfortable with that diversity. The result is that they have learned to be less discriminating than their peers or previous generation. For example, a white 18 year old’s great grandparents may have been what is now considered racist toward black people. In the grandparent’s time racism, even segregation, was thought of as perfectly normal, and those views were passed down generation to generation. However, through education and exposure racism was slowly extinguished until we have a grade 12 student who welcomes a new immigrant from Zambia. Instead of being completely racist like his great grandparents the 18 year old now only believes the stereotype that all black people like rap music which he hates. The next generation will (hopefully) not even notice that a black person is in the group. If affirmative action continues it will help the top (the existing generation of employers) meet the bottom (the well informed and accepting job applicant) and the result will be a tolerant, inclusive, and diverse work place. The attitudes of the work place will in time influence society as a whole. Conclusion I was lucky enough to learn about discrimination in both psychology and philosophy class in the same week. Although solutions are not offered in this paper, I believe discrimination can be eliminated through education and diversification. If it were normal to have a representative and diverse â€Å"melting pot† of opportunities and experiences, there would be no need to practice discrimination. Diversification is good. It makes a community tolerant and compassionate; it makes a secure and exciting place to live. Including all groups in all employment opportunities will ultimately create a better society – the melting pot that Canada so prides its identity in. Affirmative action plans ensure that the work place will contribute to this pride.