If you disagree with the Court's decision, what would you as the employer have done instead?
Are the Court's considerations for how to institute an acceptable affirmative action program consistent with how you thought affirmative action worked? Explain.
These solutions may offer step-by-step problem-solving explanations or good writing examples that include modern styles of formatting and construction of bibliographies out of text citations and references. Students may use these solutions for personal skill-building and practice. Unethical use is strictly forbidden.Q 1: I found the Court’s decision to be fascinating in how it carefully, painstakingly stepped through and progressively established its justification. The decision presented the ways in which the Agency’s program acted not in violation of Title VII but in consistence with it. The decision then considered the counterfactual program design, i.e. “mere blind hiring by the numbers” (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2009, p. 254), which would indeed have constituted a violation of Title VII. Finally, the Court examined whether the Agency’s program “unnecessarily trammeled the rights” (p. 255) of other employees and—reasonably—found the program to have avoided that considerable pitfall. So, for the clear, sequential, and thorough way in which the Court presented its reasoning, the decision necessarily made convincing sense to me...
By purchasing this solution you'll be able to access the following files: