Initial effects of Proposition 209 examined

Thursday, October 30, 1997

Thursday, October 30, 1997

Initial effects of Proposition 209 examined

OPPORTUNITY: Discrimination complaints rise as funds for investigations down

By Scot Sargeant

Daily Bruin Contributor

There is a disparity between discrimination complaints and actions to resolve them, a UCLA study found.

The California Policy Seminar, a University of California think tank, examined the impact of affirmative action programs in California. They revealed that funding for investigation of gender-based and racial discrimination has declined. In comparison, there was an enormous increase in complaints of racial discrimination.

This study is the first to examine the effects of affirmative action programs on public sector employment in California before the passage of Proposition 209, which banned the use of affirmative action in hiring, university admissions and contracting by state and local government.

"What we have seen over the past few years is not just efforts to stop the use of affirmative action but a real decline in our commitment to ensure a discrimination-free workplace," said Paul Ong, UCLA professor of urban planning and social welfare and director of the study's national team of scholars.

"We are certainly at a pivotal point in the affirmative action debate," Ong said. "Ironically, California, whose first anti-discrimination policies, adopted in 1934, predated federal policies by almost a decade, is at the forefront again."

This time, however, California is at the forefront because of the number of discrimination complaints.

The central question one must ask now is about how ending affirmative action will impact California.

Ong and his colleagues said that it is one question they cannot answer. "At best, any answers would involve much speculation," Ong said.

"While it is tempting to say that Proposition 209 would eliminate the gains made over the past several decades, societal attitudes and private employment practices may mitigate those effects," the think tank's study says.

"In the absence of strict enforcement of nondiscrimination policies, however, it is very likely that further progress ... will be slow," the study continued. "Discrimination is still a serious problem."

Strict enforcement of employment policies is lacking because of a long decline in fiscal support for the California Fair Employment Practices Commission (FEPC), the agency in charge of investigating discrimination complaints.

The study found that from 1980-1981 to 1992-1993, funding for the commission fell 33 percent, after adjusting for inflation. At the same time, the number of complaints rose substantially, to a 279 percent increase in race-based cases, and a 280 percent increase in gender-based complaints.

This study also found that affirmative action has increased employment and business opportunities for minorities and women in California, primarily by offering increased positions in the public sector. Minority and women-owned businesses also saw increased hiring through public contracting.

Those most likely to be affected by the elimination of affirmative action are California's largest and most successful minority-owned firms. This is because they tend to be more dependent on revenue from sales to the government than smaller firms.

Depending on the ability of the private labor market to absorb displaced public-sector workers, eliminating affirmative action programs could result in lower wages for women and people of color, the study said. Another possible result could be underemployment for some female and minority managers and professionals, the study said.

"Most Californians acknowledge the need to fight discriminatory practices and to ensure 'real' equal opportunity. Unfortunately, achieving this goal will not be easy, given the recent history of reduced state support for enforcement of anti-discrimination laws," Ong said.