This may come as a surprise, but I am not disappointed by the initials D.E.I. being stricken from the corporate lexicon. It is far more important for corporations and public agencies to be organizations in which diversity, equality, and inclusion are simply a way of life, an unheralded part of the ordinary way of doing things.
Like so many other publicly lauded programs to improve conditions of employment, D.E.I. was, I fear, little more than the flavor of the month. Top management adopted the language, announced changes, ran workshops, and did nothing to change their own behavior. There were and are exceptions, of course, but I imagine they were and are the exceptions. Rank-and-file employees, if the past is any guide, groaned under the imposition from above of yet another new program everyone knew was window dressing to satisfy the market and social justice advocates.
That said, social justice advocates are right: the principles and goals of D.E.I. are ways to improve the efficiency, effectiveness, robustness, and future of every organization, public or private. The only way to make them work is to skip the P.R. and do the work without fanfare. Just do it, as one fanfare-loving company likes to put it.
Trump and right-wing media have flooded the nation with propaganda claiming that D.E.I. mandates quotas for the employment of physically, emotionally, and intellectually challenged persons regardless of job requirements. Race is never mentioned but clearly intended. They have said it so often and with such fierce determination that many believe it to be true. There have been real quota programs in our recent history. The most important was veterans’ preference. Veterans’ preference laws required that any veteran who met the basic standards for a public service job had to be put at the head of the line, ahead of even more qualified candidates. Veterans’ preference was intended to honor those who had served in wartime and get them back into the civilian labor force as quickly as possible. A quota system that exists today is the one Trump has announced, requiring I.C.E. to arrest and deport so many thousands every day. Another quota system currently in place is requiring federal employees to swear personal loyalty to Trump above their oath to the Constitution if they want to retain their jobs.
If we are honest with ourselves, we must admit that being a white male was the default qualification for most any job. Of course, there were other requirements, but the expectation was that those who could meet the requirements would most likely be white males. Anyone else had to prove superior capability to even be mildly considered. Even when organizations were intent on fair employment practices, it was hard to keep white males from gravitating toward the front of the line, just as veterans went to the head of the line under veterans’ preference. Anyone who claims otherwise is ignoring the plain facts. An acquaintance once complained to me that no white man could get a job as a police officer or firefighter in Hawaii. It was blatant discrimination against whites, he said. Unique among states, there is no racial majority in Hawaii, and whites do not make up a plurality. The reality is that being white in Hawaii gives you no advantage, nor does anyone else gain an advantage except for one thing: preference is given to people who know the local culture and are part of it. It imperfectly demonstrates what no-fanfare D.E.I. might look like.
The fundamental principles of D.E.I. do not lower standards; standards are raised by them because default preferences for white males are eliminated: only qualifications count.
A significant portion of the population does not believe that. They will not believe it. They cannot be convinced. Moreover, they are deeply, angrily offended when the implication is that they are prejudiced in some way. That’s why P.R.-oriented D.E.I. programs don’t work. They are seen in part for what they are: P.R. programs with little substance behind them. They are also seen for what they are feared to be: a threat to opportunities for advancement, enrichment, and achieving the American dream if all these unqualified others are allowed to take an equitable place in society. It is particularly infuriating when these unqualified others are said to be pushed to the head of the line. It is a mindset difficult to change. That is why it is more important just to do the work, let it be the way things are done in this place, and skip all the fanfare that nobody trusts or believes anyway.
You may be right about the negative consequences of DEI ( as in affirmative action hiring practices) and yes, it was sometimes just a fashionable thing to put on a corporate or government website; however, once it is removed and all those associated with it fired, it sends a message that Diversity and equity is wrong or even unlawful. I agree corporations just need to do the right thing but I fear this is just the “thin edge of the wedge,” as my father would say.
After exclaiming the evils of DEI it will seem reasonable to go after anti discrimination language which would justify removing the Civil Rights Act includingTitle IX, Title VI etc.
I don’t think forcefully removing anti discrimination language will is an incentive to treat people fairly. I think we will return to the 1950s.
An excellent point. I admit I am asking a lot. I am asking corporations and public agencies to have the courage to continue doing the work of D. E. I. Without waving the flag. Let Trump and Company be satisfied with their hollow victory while courageous Americans continue to do the hard work. Can that happen? I have my doubts. American corporations and public agencies have shown little courage so far. But that is what I am asking.
sent you a comment and got a “failure” notice
Hi Steven, in this essay you made some pretty serious claims; I am wondering in particular about the citation you can offer for the statement, “Another quota system currently in place is requiring federal employees to swear personal loyalty to Trump above their oath to the Constitution if they want to retain their jobs.” If certainly feels that way, but has this been explicitly required? That sounds like Hitler requiring the military the swear allegiance to him rather than Germany.
I agree that DEIA may have been a PR stunt for some companies, but it is clear to me that racism, sexism, and ableism are still endemic realities in our culture; the suggestion that we should simply do the right thing seems naive or overly optimistic about the culture in which we live, and the pervasive infection of racist sin that still permeates our life together.
David: Item the first. I think the recent episode with the DOJ and the demand that the case against Adams be droppedproves the requirement of loyalty to Trump over the Constitution, but admit it’s not a quota systgem per se.
Item the second: you are the second person to forcefully challenge my belief that the way D. E. I. Have been structured in many corporations and organizations was in sincere flag-waving at best. I based my assertion from experience over several decades with a number of corporate Degood programs that were publicly hailed what implementation was imposed from the top down without the top ever participating. Those on whom it was imposed knew how valuable it would be if top management actually believed in it but also knew it would come to nothing and the next time something new was offered something new would be announced. In other words, the flavor of the month. What I want is the actual D. E. I. Work done with accountability as its measure. It was James who said something like show me your faith by your work, then I will believe you. As it is, the initials D. E. I. Have been poisoned by the Trump propaganda machine. The only honest thing to do is to do the hard work anyway regardless of what it is called. In my humble opinion, corporate top management showed its metal that’s METTLE by how quickly it crumbled. Blind guy dictating
David Benedict had difficulty responding to the article with a comment. So on his behalf here it is:
Well, I don’t really know much about how DEI functions, but the concept is like the Affirmative Action programs I ran as Director of HR for a pharmaceutical company in NJ for 18 years. It was monitored by the Federal EEOC with strict guidelines for reporting on the status of minorities and women in the employment and promotion processes across the whole company organization. It didn’t diminish the quality of the hires or promotions, but rather countered the human tendency not to give people of color and women a fair opportunity to access jobs and be promoted. My sense is that DEI is the follow-up on maintaining a fair employment culture in the workplace. I think the far right attacks on DEI are the same as those made against AA and intended to destroy current programs without solid evidence they are superficial and discriminatory. David