Vote 2020 graphic
Everything you need to know about and expect during
the most important election of our lifetimes

Trump's Department of Labor Is Targeting Microsoft for Pledging to Hire More Black Managers

A Microsoft store on Aug. 3, 2020 in New York.
A Microsoft store on Aug. 3, 2020 in New York.
Photo: Cindy Ord (Getty Images)

Trump’s Department of Labor has opened an investigation into whether Microsoft violated federal law by promising to hire more Black and African American managers and leaders, ABC News reported on Wednesday.

Advertisement

Microsoft has faced criticism for years about a lack of diversity everywhere from its rank and file to the executive suites, as well as accounts of a racially hostile work environment. Corporate vice president and general counsel Dev Stahlkopf wrote in a blog post that the DOL investigation, run by its Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (OFCCP), “has focused on whether Microsoft’s commitment to double the number of Black and African American people managers, senior individual contributors and senior leaders in our U.S. workforce by 2025 could constitute unlawful discrimination on the basis of race, which would violate Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.” The DOL told Stahlkopf in a letter that the promise “appears to imply that employment action may be taken on the basis of race.”

Stahlkopf added in his statement that Microsoft’s promise to double the number of senior employees who are Black or African American is “emphatically” not a violation of labor law and the company has “every confidence that Microsoft’s diversity initiative complies fully with all U.S. employment laws.”

Advertisement

News of the DOL investigation follows a batshit, racist executive order from the Trump administration on Sept. 22 that threatened federal agencies and contractors with loss of funding and contract terminations if they did not immediately act to terminate diversity training programs it contends are part of a “malign ideology.” The terms are both sweeping and subjective, banning training that promotes the idea the U.S. is “fundamentally racist or sexist” or that any individual, on the basis of their sex or race, is “inherently racist, sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.”

The order itself came after a Sept. 4 White House memo that suggested agencies search their training programs for mentions of “critical race theory,” “white privilege,” “intersectionality,” “systemic racism,” “positionality,” “racial humility” and “unconscious bias.” Washington Post reported. That’s wording that could easily be interpreted to refer to programs like unconscious bias training, which is intended to make workers aware of any potential biases they may harbor to avoid acting on them in the workplace.

The DOL investigation is into suspected violations of Title VII, not the the executive order, but it’s part of a cohesive push to roll back anti-racist policies in U.S. workplaces by executive fiat. Bloomberg reported that on Sept. 28, the OFCCP announced it had created hotlines to report “offensive and anti-American race and sex stereotyping and scapegoating” under the order.

Both the memo and the order have resulted in confusion across the government, according to the Post, despite efforts by federal officials to translate something that is widely suspected to have been inspired by Fox News segments into coherent policy.

Advertisement

For example, Park Service employees told the Post that racial sensitivity courses, training on how to ensure equal access to blind or deaf visitors, tribal consultation, and interrupting “inappropriate and offensive behavior” at work were still prohibited as of Sept. 30. A number of colleges have halted diversity programs.

Microsoft said it would focus on hiring more Black and African American people to senior roles after its dismal 2019 diversity report showed just 4.5 percent of its workforce are Black, as are less than three percent of its senior roles, according to the Wall Street Journal. Former U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division official Samuel Bagenstos told Bloomberg that the DOL’s intervention “seems like a perversion of everything this agency is supposed to be about” and Microsoft’s pledge “is the kind of thing that, in prior administrations, the Department of Labor had been telling federal contractors they should be doing.”

Advertisement

“We are clear that the law prohibits us from discriminating on the basis of race,” Stahlkopf wrote in the blog post. “We also have affirmative obligations as a company that serves the federal government to continue to increase the diversity of our workforce, and we take those obligations very seriously. We have decades of experience and know full well how to appropriately create opportunities for people without taking away opportunities from others.”

"... An upperclassman who had been researching terrorist groups online." - Washington Post

Share This Story

Get our newsletter

DISCUSSION

spoutin-wyze
Spoutinwyzer

This reminds me of the IT issue where women weren’t going to colleges and learning IT courses and thus wouldn’t be hired as much in industry. The employers can only ire form the pool of talent that is available.

Creating a rule to hire based on “personal equity” as our local government put it, is on paper, discrimination.

I admit the idea behind it’s motives are to balance out what other factors are causing. (ie: hate against a sex/minority in a field may deter people form choosing those fields for schooling to begin with”.

At any rate, onp aper saying you will hire X or Y simply due to factors that are protected, is discrimination.

Affirmative action was merely government mandated prejudice.

For example I got a call back for a job i applied for in gov, by leaving my “employee equity” form blank. It was optional during hiring submissions. When the onboarding team was doing 2nd round of interviews, they asked me to fill out the form again advising they needed to score me against other candidates. The employee equity form has 3 questions.

1) What sex are you

2) What race are you

3) Do you have any disabilities

I advised I was a white male, with no disabilities that i have acquired a handicapped sticker for.

I was instantly sent an email “thanks for your participation in the onboarding process but we have gone with another candidate”

The thought crossed my mind, of these 3 questions, I have control over one of them. the last one.

If I cut off my own foot, I could apply to get a disability permit, and would then have gained employee equity.

To me this seems pretty straight forward it is prejudice. And yes I realize it’s not a popular stance being a liberal. But i stand by it, and frankly, trump may have fumbled onto an actual legitimate argument here.