Staff Affirmative Action Plan

Diversity after Prop. 209

By Alisa Farenzena
From the September 2004 Print Edition

This summer, the Office of Human Resources unveiled its 2004-2005 Staff Affirmative Action Plan [PDF].

The annually-updated campus plan, this year’s of which went into effect on July 1, addresses staff hiring procedures and states that it is the policy of UC Berkeley to undertake affirmative action “for minorities and women, for persons with disabilities, and for covered veterans.” In application, the plan outlines the measures the university takes to ensure equal employment opportunity and analyzes the effectiveness of these actions.

“Equal employment opportunity basically has to do with ensuring that there are no barriers to employment,” said Alfred Jocson, a data analyst for the Office of Staff Equity and Diversity Services, which is a division of the Office of Human Resources. “I think that’s something that, universally, all people want.”

According to Jocson, the plan does not violate the 1996 voter-approved Proposition 209, which banned discrimination and preferential treatment in public employment, public education and public contracting. Jocson explained that the plan does not call for special treatment for any group: “That is no longer the policy of the university — that is explicitly because of Prop. 209.”

“Prior to SP2 [a Regents’ resolution that became effective January 1, 1996] and Prop. 209, the university had a ‘substantially equally qualified’ policy; this policy gave primary consideration to fulfilling affirmative action objectives when there were two or more substantially equally qualified applicants for a position,” Jocson said. “I think that [type of preference system] is what most people think of when they hear ‘affirmative action.’”

Now, the university instead ensures that the applicant pool for a job opening includes sufficient numbers of minorities and women. The plan cites several components of inclusive recruitment, including applicant workshops, meetings with community recruitment sources and advertisements in publications and job boards in an attempt to reach all qualified applicants.

Diane Schachperle, director of public affairs for the American Civil Rights Institute, voiced approval for these measures: “Casting a wide net is a great thing, to make sure that all segments of the community are aware of a job opening and have the opportunity to apply without discrimination,” she said.

According to Jocson, the hiring decision is then made in accordance with the law — without consideration of race or gender.

“Diversity promotes a good environment in which to work because it provides more exposure to people of different backgrounds,” said UC Berkeley sophomore Brianna Lee. “I think whatever can promote diversity is great, and this process is legal and sounds organized.”

The Plan states on Page 1 that one of its major components is an assessment, which “requires complex record-keeping systems for collecting information about applicants and about the numerous personnel transactions affecting career staff employees.” UC Berkeley uses several data systems, including Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Access and AutoAAP Version 10 affirmative action planning software from the Biddle Consulting Group.

The plan clearly specifies that racial information be collected “for affirmative action purposes.” However, Jocson said the plan will not be rendered obsolete if the reworded Racial Privacy Initiative is approved by California voters in an upcoming election: “As long as the Federal government requires the gathering of racial and ethnic data and an affirmative action plan, it must continue.”

Schachperle confirms that fact, but has reservations about its purpose. “They would still have to collect that data and turn it over to the Feds, but we question the necessity and use of excessive amounts of data,” she said. “It cannot prove discrimination — only disparity.”

The plan also states that it must “be evaluated, monitored and updated annually.”

“This office [Staff Equity and Diversity Services] completes the plan every year,” Jocson said. “We then submit it to the Office of the President for their review; it goes to the Office of the General Council within the Office of the President, then the assistant vice chancellor for human resources, the vice chancellor for business and administrative services and then the chancellor.”

UC Berkeley, a federal contractor, originally created the Staff Affirmative Action Plan in response to “President Lyndon Johnson’s Executive Order 11246,” according to Jocson.

The order, issued on September 24, 1965, stated that a government contractor may “not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin.”

Thus, the original usage of the term “affirmative action,” ruled out racial preferences, not required them. Now, in a post-209 California, the Staff Affirmative Plan actually conforms to the language of the order.

If you enjoyed this article, please consider supporting the Patriot