|
Contributors
K. Lloyd Billingsley - Contributor
[Courtesty of Pacific Research
Institute]
K. Lloyd
Billingsley is Editorial Director for the Pacific
Research Institute and has been widely published on topics
including on popular culture, defense policy, education reform,
and many other current policy issues. [go to Billingsley index]
 Shakedown
Lawsuits Live On
Despite Prop 64…
[K.
Lloyd Billingsley] 12/7/04
The victory
of Proposition 64 does not mean that shakedown lawsuits have
disappeared. They continue to thrive,
as a recent case involving Abercrombie & Fitch confirms.
The retailer will
pay out $40 million, a hefty $10 million of it in attorney
fees, as part of a settlement of three lawsuits
charging that the company discriminates against women and minorities.
Abercrombie & Fitch denies the charges and settled the suits
to avoid a lengthy dispute. The settlement requires the company
to institute "diversity" training for managers, hire
more minorities in sales and management, and even to change its
marketing.
In such cases, activist groups target a deep-pockets firm they
believe violates the canons of political correctness. The lawyers
troll for plaintiffs and charge that numerical conditions at
the company prove discrimination. The underlying dogma is that
every ethnic group must be employed according to its representation
in the population. If such conditions don't exist, the cause
is held to be discrimination, which must be remedied by government
action.
The lawyers shop for a sympathetic judge and file suit. Such
suits wield considerable leverage because the company must prove
its innocence. The activist groups come away with millions in
attorney fees, much more than any plaintiffs will ever receive.
Abercrombie & Fitch fell afoul of the politically correct
with scantily clad models held to be offensive to women. Then
they came out with a line of T-shirts with slogans such as "Wong
Brothers Laundry Service – Two Wongs Can Make it White" and "Wok-N-Bowl – Let
the Good Times Roll – Chinese Food and Bowling." The
company apologized and pulled the shirts after complaints from
student groups claiming to represent Asians. But this was enough
to make the company a target for the Asian Pacific American Legal
Center of Southern California, the NAACP Legal Defense and Education
Fund, and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund
(MALDEF).
The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission brought one
of the suits. The federal judge in San Francisco who approved
the settlement is Susan Illston, a liberal and feminist whose
nomination was first put forward by Senator Barbara Boxer. Those
who deal with such cases would do well to act in accord with
California realities instead of politically correct dogma.
Strictly speaking,
there are no minorities in California, something even Lt. Governor
Cruz Bustamante recognized. With no majority
of "Anglos," "Whites," "Latinos," or
any other misleading tag, the concept of a minority loses validity.
Statistical disparities among groups are the rule, not the exception,
because of such factors as personally differences, effort, and
choice.
In 1996 Californians
approved Proposition 209, which bars racial preferences in
state employment, contracting, and education.
The majority that voted for this measure is not likely to approve
the concept of government-enforced quotas in the private sector.
That is what "diversity" means, and what the action
against Abercrombie & Fitch seeks to impose, while bagging
millions in attorney fees.
Court imposed diversity training and mandates on marketing make
it more costly to conduct business and create hostility in the
workplace. The administrations in Washington and Sacramento should
take affirmative action to stop politically correct shakedown
suits. One solution would be a ballot measure extending Proposition
209 to the private sector and making the Golden State a quota-free
zone. CRO
copyright
2004 Pacific Research Institute
§
|
