Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

An increasingly controversial area within the realm of governmental hiring policies lies in the distinction between the passive or colorblind approach to equal employment opportunity and the results-based orientation more commonly associated with affirmative action programs. A national survey of urban personnel managers revealed a marked tendency to prefer policies perceived to be less compensatory toward protected classes and more compatible with merit norms. The authors conclude that the EEO bias characteristic of most city officials coupled with the staffing and personnel management philosophy of the Reagan Administration does not augur well for the future of affirmative action program implementation.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Backoff

R. W.

Rainey

H. G.

(1977). “Technology, Professionalization, Action and the Merit System,” pp. 113–141 in Levine

C. H.

(ed.) Managing Human Resources. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.

Bellone

C. J.

Darling

D. H.

(1980). “Implementing Affirmative Action Programs: Problems and Strategies.” Public Personnel Management 9, 3: 184–191.

Davis

C. E.

West

J. P.

(1978). “Analyzing Perceptions of Affirmative Action Issues: A Study of Mexican American Supervisors in a Metropolitan Bureaucracy.” Midwest Review of Public Administration 12, 4: 246–257.

Dye

T. R.

Ammons

J. H.

(1978). “Frostbelt and Sunbelt Cities: Aggregate Contrasts in Population, Politics, and Public Policy.” Unpublished paper delivered at the annual meeting of the Southwestern Political Science Association, Houston, Texas, April.

Elazar

D. J.

(1972). American Federalism: A View From the States, 2nd ed. New York: Thomas Y. Crowell.

Griggs v. Duke Power (1971). 401 U.S. 424.

Grossman

(1973). “The Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972: The Implications for the State and Local Government Manager.” Public Personnel Management 3, 5: 434–440.

Kranz

(1974). “Are Merit and Equity Compatible?” Public Administration Review 34, 5: 434–440.

La Noue

G. R.

(1980). “Equal Employment Opportunity: Three Conflicting Theories.” Unpublished paper delivered at the American Society for Public Administration annual convention, San Francisco, April.

10.

Meier

K. J.

(1976). “The Policy Impact of Affirmative Action: Racial Representation in the States.” Unpublished paper delivered at the Southwestern Political Science Association annual meeting, Dallas, Texas.

11.

Meier

K. J.

Nigro

L. G.

(1975). “Representative Bureaucracy and Policy Preferences: A Study in the Attitudes of Federal Executives.” Paper presented at the American Political Science Association annual convention, San Francisco.

12.

Rosen

(1974). “Affirmative Action Produces Equal Employment Opportunity for All.” Public Administration Review 34, 3: 237–239.

13.

Stewart

(1980). “Merit Systems in the 1980's,” pp. 260–274 in Hays

S. W.

Kearney

R. C.

(eds.) Public Personnel Management: Problems and Prospects. Columbia, South Carolina: University of South Carolina Bureau of Governmental Research and Service.

14.

Thompson

F. J.

(1978). “Civil Servants and the Deprived: Socio-Political and Occupational Explanations of Attitudes Toward Minority Hiring.” American Journal of Political Science 22, 2: 325–347.

15.

Thompson

F. J.

Brown

(1978). “Commitment to the Disadvantaged Among Urban Administrators.” Urban Affairs Quarterly 13, 3: 355–378.

16.

West

J. P.

(1980). “Merit, Bilateralism Equity and Reform: Attitudinal Assessment.” Paper presented at the Southwest Political Science Association annual convention, Houston, Texas.

17.

Wilson

J. Q.

(1981). “Rethinking Affirmative Action.” Miami Herald (March 8).

Implementing Public Programs: Equal Employment Opportunity,Affirmative Action,and Administrative Policy Options

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References