The document discusses the ethics of employment discrimination and affirmative action from several perspectives. It analyzes employment discrimination as unethical based on utilitarian, rights-based, distributive justice, care ethics, and virtue ethics perspectives. US law makes most forms of employment discrimination illegal. The document also discusses sexual harassment and defines it. Finally, it discusses affirmative action and provides arguments both for and against its use.

1. Issues
Employment Discrimination
Affirmative Action

2. Ethical Analysis
Utilitarian: net social benefits are
maximized when employment decisions are
based on legitimate, job-related factors
– Example: The person with the best
qualifications gets the job
– With discrimination, this doesn’t happen
– Therefore, employment discrimination is
unethical on utilitarian grounds

3. Ethical Analysis
Rights: Is there a moral right to engage in
employment discrimination? Or do people
have a moral right to be free from
discrimination, thereby creating a moral
duty not to discriminate?
– To answer

4. Ethical Analysis
Rights:
– Reversibility: I wouldn’t like it if I were
victimized by employment discrimination
– Universalizability: I can’t imagine a world in
which all employment decisions were based on
false stereotypes and prejudice instead of
legitimate, job-related factors

5. Ethical Analysis
Rights: (cont’d.):
– Respect / Free Consent: employment
discrimination does not treat the victim of the
discrimination with respect; the victim has not
freely consented to be discriminated against
– Therefore, there is no moral right to engage in
employment discrimination
– Instead, people have a moral right to be free
from discrimination, which creates the moral
duty not to engage in discrimination

6. Ethical Analysis
Distributive Justice: Is employment
discrimination fair? Does it produce a fair
distribution of benefits and costs?
– Egalitarianism: no reason to believe
discrimination produces an equal distribution of
good and harm
– Capitalism: discrimination ignores
contributions

7. Ethical Analysis
Distributive Justice (cont’d.):
– Socialism: discrimination ignores abilities and
needs (victims of discrimination likely to be
among the needy)
– Libertarianism: the victims of discrimination
have not freely chosen to be among the
victimized

8. Ethical Analysis
Distributive Justice (cont’d.):
– Rawls’s Principles:
• Equal Liberty Principle: Discrimination does not
provide equal liberties
• Equal Opportunity Principle: Discrimination does
not provide equal opportunities
• Difference Principle: Discrimination does not help
those in need as much as possible
– Therefore, employment discrimination is unfair
and therefore unethical

9. Ethical Analysis
Ethics of Care:
– A manager has a relationship with:
• Stockholders who have entrusted their investments
with management
• Customers who want good products and good
services at good prices
• Employees who want the company to be successful
so they can get good pay and benefits

10. Ethical Analysis
Ethics of Care (cont’d.):
– A manager who doesn’t make employment
decisions on the basis of legitimate, job-related
factors:
• Doesn’t hire the best qualified
• Doesn’t create incentives for good job performance
– Result: higher costs, which threatens
stockholders, customers, and employees
– Therefore, employment discrimination is
unethical

11. Ethical Analysis
Virtue Ethics:
– A manager who engages in discrimination can
be described as bigoted, biased, racist, sexist,
and so forth
– These character traits are vices, not virtues
– Therefore, employment discrimination is
unethical
All 5 moral principles reach the same
conclusion: discrimination is unethical

12. US Law
Because employment discrimination is
unethical, US law makes it illegal when it is
based on:
– Race, Color, Religion, Sex, National Origin,
Age (if 40 or older), & Disability
– Unless an exception applies
• Example: Bona Fide Occupational Qualification
(BFOQ)
– Example: Hire a “lap dancer” in a sex club
– Example: Hooters?

13. Sexual Harassment
Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission (EEOC) definition:
– See Velasquez, pp. 392–393
– 2 Main Types of Sexual Harassment:
• Quid pro quo: This for that
• Hostile environment

14. Sexual Harassment
Ethical Analysis:
– Utilitarian
– Rights (apply Kant)
– Distributive Justice
– Care
– Virtue

15. Affirmative Action
Examples of Hiring Policies:
– Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO)
– Take extra steps to get a pool of well qualified
applicants from all groups
– Use membership in a group victimized by past
discrimination as a tie breaker
– Use membership in a group victimized by past
discrimination as a plus factor
– Quotas / Preferences / Set-Asides

16. Affirmative Action
Arguments in favor of affirmative action:
– Compensatory justice
– Morally justified means to morally justified
ends
– Speeds the process of correcting the effects of
past discrimination

17. Affirmative Action
Arguments against affirmative action:
– Reverse discrimination
– Not compensatory justice due to mismatch
– Hurts the people it means to help