Microsoft, in response to the nationwide protests over racial inequality following George Floyd’s death, announced plans to diversify their predominantly White workforce. The company aimed to double the number of Black employees in senior leadership roles by 2025 and increase the number of Black-owned suppliers and transactions with Black-owned banks. Now, this pledge is facing criticism from Republican state attorneys general who argue that it sets “racially discriminatory quotas and preferences.”
Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti and Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach sent a letter to Microsoft and other Fortune 100 companies, urging them to reexamine their policies in light of a recent Supreme Court ruling that outlawed affirmative action in college admissions. While legal experts suggest that most companies are likely compliant with current laws prohibiting race or gender discrimination, the growing conservative campaign against affirmative action in hiring and other areas could potentially impact corporate efforts to address historical discrimination.
The Republican attorneys general specifically targeted Microsoft’s 2020 pledge regarding its suppliers, alleging that it established quotas for Black-owned approved suppliers and implied negative consequences for those who did not adopt racially discriminatory policies. The Labor Department also questioned Microsoft’s diversity initiative during the Trump administration, but the inquiry was closed after the company provided a response.
Both Democratic and Republican attorneys general are taking sides on this issue. The Democrats criticized the Republican letter, viewing it as intimidation that undermines efforts to reduce racial inequities in corporate America. On the other hand, the Republicans argue that the recent Supreme Court decision on affirmative action has broad implications for employers.
Legal experts note that while employers have the right to recruit qualified applicants from diverse backgrounds to counter existing discrimination, setting strict quotas could leave companies vulnerable to legal challenges. The goals should be seen as benchmarks for representation, not firm numbers. Additionally, federal contractors like Microsoft are encouraged to diversify their workforces under a 1964 executive order. However, quotas are strictly forbidden, and hiring goals should not be interpreted as ceilings or floors.
Sherrilyn Ifill, director of the 14th Amendment Center for Law & Democracy at Howard University’s law school, believes that companies with diversity hiring goals should be protected under existing law and dismisses the Republican letter as premature. However, Republican attorneys general Kobach and Skrmetti argue that the Supreme Court ruling has significant implications for employers and call for an end to any unlawful race-based quotas or preferences.
In conclusion, Microsoft’s pledge to diversify its workforce is facing scrutiny from Republican state attorneys general who argue that it promotes racially discriminatory practices. However, legal experts suggest that most companies are likely compliant with current laws, and the growing conservative campaign against affirmative action could hinder corporate efforts to address historical discrimination. Meanwhile, Democratic attorneys general support diversity-focused programs and criticize the Republican letter as intimidation. The debate around affirmative action in hiring and other settings continues to evolve, with potential legal ramifications.
Denial of responsibility! VigourTimes is an automatic aggregator of Global media. In each content, the hyperlink to the primary source is specified. All trademarks belong to their rightful owners, and all materials to their authors. For any complaint, please reach us at – [email protected]. We will take necessary action within 24 hours.
