WASHINGTON-In an unexpected blow to government efforts to foster diversity in the fast-growing telecommunications industry, a federal appeals court here last week repealed some Federal Communications Commission equal employment opportunity rules and put another nail in the coffin of affirmative action.
The ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which addressed broadcast EEO rules but could end up undermining much narrower EEO rules for commercial wireless carriers, set off immediate protests by FCC Chairman Bill Kennard and others.
“I think it is a fair reading that the court’s decision casts a cloud over the EEO rules of wireless services as well,” Kennard told RCR.
Common carrier EEO rules are more limited than those struck down by the court. Firms with 16 or more employees must file reports breaking down the makeup of management and nonmanagement employees.
The FCC chief said the trend is troubling to him in view of the growing number of Hispanics, Asians and other minorities in the United States.
“As we become more diverse, our institutions are becoming less diverse. That’s not a prescription for a healthy democracy,” Kennard said.
Kennard said discussions are ongoing with the U.S. solicitor general and the Justice Department on legal options.
“Our nation is diminished by this decision,” Rev. Jesse Jackson told reporters outside the Justice Department after a half-hour meeting he and other civil rights leaders had with Bill Lann Lee, acting assistant attorney general for civil rights.
“Demeaning diversity, by making it more difficult for women and people of color to be recruited, hired, promoted and allowed their talents to be used, is against our national interest,” Jackson added.
Jackson said the ruling “is more evidence of moves by the court toward radical resegregation, denial of gender equality while unleashing unprecedented monopoly.”
Jackson said he plans to meet with Attorney General Janet Reno, who was out of town last week, and the White House soon to discuss the issue.
The FCC can seek a rehearing before the full court and, if unsuccessful, ask the Supreme Court to review the case.
In the summer of 1995, the Supreme Court dramatically curbed federal affirmative action in the Adarand decision. Earlier that year, Congress killed tax breaks for women and minorities. The programs were aimed at increasing ownership of wireless and other telecom licenses by women and minorities.
Indeed, the high court’s ruling forced the FCC to drop race- and gender-based bidding discounts for personal communications services licenses.
However, some minorities say the FCC, despite the setbacks, shares some blame for failing to conduct a timely study of ownership and hiring trends in telecommunications that could possibly provide a legal basis for reinstituting policies to further diversity.
The attack on affirmation action is coming from the GOP-led Congress and states as well. Bills have circulated with little success in recent years to end race and gender preferences in federal programs, which would rub out the limited opening for affirmation action that survives in Adarand.
In California, the elimination of affirmative action has resulted in fewer minority enrollments in state colleges.
President Clinton has taken a `mend it, don’t end it’ position on affirmation action and has devoted time during his second term to encouraging dialogue on race in town meetings around the country.
The NAACP, which in recent years has shifted it focus from legal remedies to economic empowerment, is considering boycotting wireless and other telecom companies based on the results of its survey of hiring practices and contracting trends.
