Equal Opportunity Vs. Equal Results

[Editor’s Note: What follows is just the Introduction to Adversity.net’s analysis. The reader is encouraged to see the entire article. Links to each of the sections are at the bottom of this page.]

Today Adversity.Net released its seventh annual analysis and critique of federal overhiring of selected races in the name of “affirmative action”.

The government’s official statistics show a pattern of “un-hiring” and “retiring” white males and other non-preferred groups while overhiring blacks and other preferred groups by dozens or hundreds of percent above their proportion in the civilian work force. It is alright for the feds to violate the AA creed of “proportional representation” as long as the disproportion favors certain races.

Adversity.Net’s analysis is based on the U.S. Office of Personnel Management’s annual report “Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program”.

This year’s OPM report—covering federal Fiscal Year 2006—among other things boasts that the feds hired 6,912 new minorities last year while at the same time “dis-hiring” or “retiring” 6,280 white males and other non-preferred groups.

As always, the OPM report is confounding in two regards. First, the OPM defines “women” as minorities which category includes women of all races including “white”. Second, the OPM continues to refuse to publish any data whatsoever regarding employment of white males, and studiously avoids presenting data which depicts the decrease in employment of white males and other non-preferred groups.

From FY 2001 through FY 2006 a net total of 48,033 new minority employees have been hired by the feds. During the same period there has been a net decrease of 3,960 white male employees in federal jobs. {snip}

*NOTE: FY 2004 represents an artificial “spike” in the data. In 2004 the U.S. OPM added 168,616 job classifications to their annual EEO tally, causing a one-time distortion in data for that year. Also in 2004 OPM began using 2000 census data as the basis for its underrepresentation computations whereas in prior years they used 1990 census data.

The feds exceed their hiring quotas for blacks in all 23 independent federal agencies.

In fact, in the top three independent federal agencies for black quota hires, the other preferred groups did not do so well.

CSOS (Court Services and Offender Supervision Agency) overhired blacks by 808% over their proportion in the civilian labor force.

GPO (U.S. Gov’t Printing Office) overhired blacks by 503% over their proportion in the civilian labor force.

PBGC (the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation) overhired blacks by 409% over their proportion in the civilian labor force.

Almost all the other preferred race / gender groups in these three agencies were hired at rates at or below their proportion in the civilian labor force.

Similarly, in 17 of the 18 federal executive departments, blacks were overhired by 14% to 363% over their proportion in the civilian labor force. {snip}

HUD (U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development) overhired blacks by 363% over their proportion in the civilian labor force.

The Department of Education overhired blacks by 329% over their proportion in the civilian labor force.

And the U.S. Department of State overhired blacks by 231% over their proportion in the civilian labor force.

Most of the other preferred groups were hired by these three agencies at significantly lower levels than blacks.

*Source:  Annual Report to the Congress, Federal Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program, FY 2006