Xerox recently lost an employment discrimination case before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (Frank v. Xerox Corp.). At issue was the companyโ€™s โ€œBalanced Workforce Initiative,โ€ begun โ€œin the 1990โ€™s for the stated purpose of insuring that all racial and gender groups were proportionately represented at all levels of the company.โ€ The Houston office detected a racial imbalance, and so its general manager took steps โ€œto remedy the disproportionate racial representationโ€ there, โ€œset[ting] specific racial goals for each job and grade level โ€ฆ.โ€ The Fifth Circuit found that โ€œthe existence of the [Balanced Workforce Initiative] is sufficient to constitute direct evidence of a form or practice of discrimination.โ€ After all, โ€œXerox candidly identified explicit racial goals for each job and grade level,โ€ and the evidence โ€œindicate[d] that managers were evaluated on how well they complied withโ€ the initiativeโ€™s objectives.

An appalling company policy and an excellent judicial decision. And hereโ€™s the kicker: The plaintiffs were African Americans and the company had concluded that โ€œblacks were over-represented and whites were under-representedโ€! Critics of affirmative action and diversity initiatives have always pointed out that one problem even the left should have with racial balancing is that you never know which groups will find themselves being discriminated against and, what do you know, they (we) were right.