right paigetheoracle.. Its a British thing.
I researched it a bit, and found a few articles on it.. here is an abrreviated explanation/analysis...
Heres the Url, but I am unsure if you can view it, its from Infotrac database
http://web5.infotrac-college.com/wadsworth/session/458/382/89451807/18!xrn_3_0_A140959241
Personnel Today, Jan 17, 2006 p10
Is there a case for positive discrimination? Michael Millar.
Full Text: COPYRIGHT 2006 Reed Business Information Ltd. Positive discrimination is illegal. But could it make our workforces more representative of society? Michael Millar investigates.
Last week, Personnel Today revealed that Trevor Phillips, the chair of the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE), was backing a recruitment company that was catering for graduates from a "visibly non-white background". This was a clear case of positive discrimination, which is contrary to the Race Relations Act 1976.
The firm, Rare Recruit-ment, subsequently changed the wording on its website and declared its services were open to all. But while Rare's 'cut-off point' for applicants breached the Act, it is not difficult to see the merit in what it was trying to do: give employers the opportunity to search a pool of talent that traditionally they may have ignored.
The official Labour Force Survey shows that, for men, the difference in employment rates between ethnic minority groups and the general population is just under 20%. This means services provided by the likes of Rare are vital, according to the firm's backers.
...
But employers with similarly honourable intentions have found themselves on the wrong side of the law.
Somerset and Avon Police is being investigated by the CRE after reports revealed it had rejected 186 white applicants because its workforce was "over-represented by white men".
Would it be so bad to allow positive discrimination if it helps to create a workforce that is more representative of the community?
This is particularly relevant for public sector services such as the police, which face tough government targets on the number of officers with ethnic minority backgrounds they should employ.
...
Positive discrimination in job selection because of gender is unlawful under the Sex Discrimination Act (1975). But this begs the question again of whether or not discriminating against male candidates would be a 'quick-fix', allowing women to rapidly occupy jobs they thought would never be available to them.
This argument doesn't hold water with Alison Hodgson, chairwoman of the Association of Graduate Recruiters. She believes it is much more constructive and healthy to base recruitment decisions on talent.
"Quotas are the stuff of last century. The world of work has moved on so much," she said. "Colour is a red herring - what should be important is what skills you need to build your business."
...
Disincentive
However, Bothwick believes this still doesn't make a case for allowing positive discrimination, which she said could actually act as a disincentive to those it is trying to help.
"Most organisations won't support positive discrimination and most candidates won't either. Would you like to know you're only in a job because of the colour of your skin?" she asked.
"Where businesses have identified a gap in the reach of their recruitment and there is specialist advice available it is worth pursuing, but not to the detriment of anyone else. It's about finding the brightest talent from the biggest pool."
Even the EOC, despite its damning survey findings, agrees that positive discrimination should give way to positive action.
