Affirmative Action

I had lower expectations of blacks than of whites, and so I was willing to excuse poor service merely because the person was black [Source], so says Gauteng Blog, whom I frequent. But that can't be right because at another point Gauteng Blog clearly indicates that there must be "black financial advisors who are highly competent, and white financial advisors who are totally incompetent." So if there are, why would anyone have lower expectations when it comes to black people? That's the first thing that's wrong with this picture. The second thing that's wrong is that when a black professional is incompetent, Gauteng Blog attributes it to affirmative action, which is a system designed to hire minorities in order to eliminate unfair discrimination. Tell me what's wrong with the following:

Employers must make sure designated groups (black people, women and people with disabilities) have equal opportunities in the workplace. Designated groups must be equally represented in all job categories and levels [Source].

Having equal opportunities in the workplace is actually good, it is progressive, and it falls in line with the general direction of the eleven-year-old South Africa. However, the Gauteng Blog reader is led to believe that the workforce is gradually becoming incompetent because more blacks are being hired. That amounts to a bold statement, indeed. The purpose of South Africa's Employment Equity Act is to "achieve equity in the workplace, by promoting equal opportunity and fair treatment in employment through the elimination of unfair discrimination; and implementing affirmative action measures to redress the disadvantages in employment experienced by designated groups, to ensure their equitable representation in all occupational categories and levels in the workforce [Source].

So what is unfair discrimination? Isn't any kind of discrimination unfair (to put it mildly)? When you have two equally qualified potential candidates before you, and you employ the one with the big tits, or with a penis, or with a paler skin, then you're practising unfair discrimination because those traits usually have no bearing on getting the job done. But in reality candidates with a paler skin do get hired more often than candidates with a darker skin, and this of course also happens in other parts of the world.

Show me a text that says blacks, women and the disabled can be hired even when they are less qualified than other candidates, and I'll cry foul with you. I have previously indicated that at the core I was against affirmative action, and I am, but it is essential, much as an anonymous curriculum vitae (which is being debated in France) is essential, until the playing field is level, until the prejudice wrought by Apartheid has been redressed, and until people are given jobs solely because they are the best qualified for those jobs.

Comments

[GP]

It's nice to see that people still read my blog :-)

Yes, I do have lower expectations of black South Africans in general. This because they were denied educational opportunities, and capital in the past, as a group. Apartheid was designed to make black people as a group less capable than whites, it did succeed, unfortunately.

When I deal with previously disadvantaged individuals, I do subconciously wonder if they got there because of their skin colour and affirmative action.

Of course, when I deal with incompetant white people, I have similar thoughts - did they get their positions because of connections under the previous regime? Where would they have been if they were not coddled by Apartheid?

Is this racist? Probably. But one can't legislate human nature or attitudes. When a group of people gains from discrimination, people from other groups (and even from the same group), will automatically question whether the individual members of that group would have been able to make it on a level playing field.

I will consider the rest of your points at a later stage.

[Rethabile]

Oh yes, we do read your blog. Please keep writing it.

Your reason for having lower expectations from black people is "valid," but remains unsatisfactory. Perhaps that is because [1.] the subject we're talking about is not cartesian but is emotional, and is about people.

Yes, Apartheid was designed to make black people "less capable than" white people, but even if it succeeded (which I don't believe), affirmative action seeks only to hire the black person, the woman and the disabled person when they are as capable of doing the job as any other candidate. Whatever Apartheid might have done to people in this designated group, [2.] they're there for the job with a diploma in hand and experience on their slate, just like the white person!

This is not at all like a white person being hired solely on the basis of skin colour, which often happened in the past. Sure, there were probably many white people who got jobs in that way, but who also had diplomas and experience. It wasn't always the case, however. I must say again that I understand the reason you put forth, but I think it isn't strong enough to justify your expectations with regard to service from black professionals.

And keep blogging.

[xavier]

why is it that black people must apologize for affirmative action or see it as wrong. The premise of your post (that people actually get jobs because of merit) is totally ridiculous. While going to a top school and getting good marks on your exams helps it doesn't ensure anything. People often get jobs because of who they know, or because they "can fit in". I know this because I have been on many a hiring committee where people were hired on the basis of a recommendation from the 'right' person or because they belonged to the same fraternal organization, the same church, just seemed 'nice', went to the same varsity, etc. People who were on paper more qualified did not even get the interview much less the job. I wish people would stop pretending that there is some neutral thing out there called 'merit' and realize that getting a job has little to do with your 'qualifications' particularly in this age where with the exception of a few specialized professions, (medicine and engineering being two of them) most people with a degree can be trained to do most jobs. 'Merit' is an ideological tool used to keep people out of certain positions, particularly people of colour and women.

[Rethabile Masilo]

"why is it that black people must apologize for affirmative action or see it as wrong?"
--------------------
They shouldn't, and it isn't wrong. I see it as something that, although necessary, condones negative stereotypes that others have of black people.

"The premise of your post (that people actually get jobs because of merit) is totally ridiculous."
--------------------
The premise of my post is that people don't, but should, get jobs according to merit, yes. If not, then everybody across the spectrum should have equal chances. There should not be any short-listing based on colour.

"I wish people would stop pretending that there is some neutral thing out there called 'merit' and realize that getting a job has little to do with your 'qualifications' particularly in this age where with the exception of a few specialized professions, (medicine and engineering being two of them) most people with a degree can be trained to do most jobs."
--------------------
Then let those people who do get jobs through means other than qualification and experience... let those people be black, too. And white. And Indian. And "coloured." Let everyone who knows someone, who is a member of the right organization, worships in such and such a church, etc... let those people all get jobs that way, not only a certain section of the population.

My point is less to extol people getting a job by merit, but more to discredit having only some people getting a job by non-merit. Other than that, you took the words of your comment right out of my mouth. I agree with you on how people do get hired in the real world.

[Juan]

I do not see why GP needs to make comments like, blacks were denied educational opportunities,in order to quantify his stance.

How did whites deny them education?
By tying them up and not allowing them to learn?
Since when did it become our responsibility to educate other cultures?

Since you advocate so strongly that your culture is equal to mine?

Give me proof of where you invented something or built something that we cant or couldnt?

Or did we steal your brick making techniques and sand too?

My arguments might seem like typical colonialist arguments, but history has very few instances that help YOUR arguments.

We built these universities that you now claim as yours.

Your arguments that AA is justified are all based on a belief that you would have built all this and achieved all this if we had never come here.

Again history, nor the present, offer much proof to assist you.

[Rethabile]

I decided to reply to Juan with a separate post: http://mzansiafrika.typepad.com/mzansi_afrika/2006/04/did_we_steal_yo.html