Questions

1- In a nutshell, the commonly cited arguments in favor of affirmative action include the following:

ü It creates fairness and equal opportunity within organizations.

ü It benefits third parties: society as a wholewill be more harmonious as discrimination recedes.

ü It reduces tensions in an organization.

ü It benefits organizations by helping them reach their goals.

ü It is compensation for past wrongs.

Which of these arguments appear to stand behind affirmative ction at Google? Explain. Are any of the other justifications applicable even though they may not be the reasonGoogle seeks diverse talent?

2- In sweeping terms there are two types of arguments in favor of affirmative action. First, it serves a broad social good by integrating society. Second, companies employing affirmative action do better in the marketplace than those that don’t. If you had to choose one of these as a better and more persuasive argument for affirmative action, which would you choose? Why?

3- At some publicly funded universities, scholarships are, in essence, set aside for minorities. Google privately funds scholarships that are, in essence, set aside for minorities. Taxpayers, in other words, fund one affirmative action endeavor and private investors the other. Now, is one endeavor ethically superior to the other? Why or why not?

4- With an eye on these arguments against affirmative action, can you make the case that Google’s efforts are ethically reproachable?

5- What does the veil of ignorancetest for discrimination? Put yourself under the veil of ignorance. Now, do you believe Google’s hiring policiesare ethically good or bad? Why?