Carrier JB Hunt Transport Services was a frequent target of workplace discrimination lawsuits. In 2016, four Sikh drivers accused their employer of ill-treatment on account of their turbans. Six years later, an employee from Ghana claimed he had been unfairly dismissed because of his origins. But the charge of racial discrimination, brought in January 2023, took many by surprise. This time, it involved Ryan Waters, a human resources executive, who claimed he had been dismissed because he is a white man. Surprise? Well, not quite.
Recently in the US, several claims have been brought against major corporations alleging racial discrimination against Caucasian men.
These actions result from a 2023 Supreme Court decision concerning student admissions to Harvard and the University of North Carolina. A majority of the justices ruled against the enactment of "Affirmative Action," concluding that universities should no longer take into account the skin color of applicants, as this would disadvantage white students.
University admission requirements have obviously little to do with corporate management. But on the strength of this first victory against Harvard, Edward Blum, founder of the American Alliance for Equal Rights, declared that his next targets would be corporations and their "diversity and inclusion" programs, supposedly benefiting racial minorities, women, the disabled and LGBTQ employees.
Edward Blum and his allies, such as Stephen Miller, a former immigration advisor to Donald Trump and founder of America First Legal, point to the Fundamental Rights Protection Acts of 1866 and 1964. The interpretation of these laws, which in principle provide protection for the oppressed black, Latino or Asian minorities, has been diverted by Blum, who considers that, today, the victims are white.
Three major law firms, Perkins Coie, Morrison & Foerster and Winston & Strawn, which offered scholarships to minority law school students, found themselves accused. So were Macy's department stores, Pfizer Laboratories, the Fearless venture capital fund, and Florida's Honeyfund, which lists wedding gifts.
But when the judges examined Pfizer's promotion support for Black, Latino and Native American employees, they noted that the plaintiffs were unable to provide "any names" of victims of the program. Pfizer won the case. However, as a precautionary measure, Pfizer changed its criteria for admission to the program. The criterion of race has been removed, to avoid future expensive court cases and the bad publicity associated with this alleged discrimination.
You have 49.39% of this article left to read. The rest is for subscribers only.