The Legal Environment of Human Resources Management 81
national origin, disability, and age. The equal employment opportunity
and affi rmative action laws create legal responsibilities for employers and
affect all aspects of the employment relationship. Recruitment, selection,
training, compensation and benefi ts, promotions, and terminations must
all be conducted in a nondiscriminatory manner.
Whereas equal employment opportunity is a policy of nondiscrimina-
tion, affi rmative action requires employers to analyze their workforces and
develop plans of action to recruit, select, train, and promote members of
protected classes and develop plans of action to correct areas in which past
discrimination may have occurred. Affi rmative action in the United States
is jointly determined by the Constitution, legislative acts, executive orders,
and court decisions. The Offi ce of Federal Contract Compliance Pro-
grams is responsible for developing and enforcing most affi rmative action
plans, although the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission enforces
affi rmative action plans in the federal sector.
Affi rmative action is used by the federal government to promote
a more diverse workforce. Recipients of federal funds are required to
develop affi rmative action plans that encourage the recruitment, selec-
tion, training, and promotion of qualifi ed disabled individuals, Vietnam
War veterans, and individuals who may have been discriminated against
because of their race, sex, color, and national origin. Affi rmative ac-
tion plans can be involuntary or voluntary. Involuntary action plans
have increasingly come under intense scrutiny, and affi rmative action
itself is being challenged. On April 1, 2003, the Supreme Court heard
arguments challenging the use of race in the admissions policies at the
University of Michigan and its law school ( Gratz v. Bollinger , 2003, and
Grutter v. Bollinger , 2003, respectively).
Major corporations, including Microsoft, Bank One, General Motors,
Shell, and American Express, and the Army, Navy and Air Force acad-
emies fi led briefs supporting the University of Michigan ’ s race - conscious
admissions policies. Supporters of using race as one of many factors
in the admissions process believe that diversity creates stronger organiza-
tions. On June 23, 2003, the Supreme Court upheld the affi rmative action
plan of the law school. Justice Sandra Day O ’ Connor, writing for the
majority, which included Justices Stephen G. Breyer, John Paul Stevens,
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and David H. Souter, stated:
The hallmark of the law school ’ s policy is its focus on academic
ability coupled with a fl exible assessment of applicant ’ s talents,
experiences and potential “ to contribute to the learning of those