Legal Welfare from 1971 and the Curse of Credentialism


Recommended Posts

Excellent and important article on a 1971 SCOTUS's decision effect on education and meritocracy in modern employment and student debt.

http://www.spectator.org/articles/60741/how-the-supreme-court-created-the-student-loan-bubble

--Brant

I can't make this link work right yet so try this one in the meantime and scroll down to the Sept 2014 article on the student loan bubble:

http://www.spectator.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Their money and brainpower would be better spent overturning Griggs v. Duke Power Company.

The 1971 Supreme Court decision remains largely unknown, but no ruling of the past forty-five years (except for Roe v. Wade) has done more harm to the American way of life. It changed the way companies hire, pay, and promote workers, ensuring that America would be a country defined by credentials rather than merit. Griggs is why we’re wasting money and time on a dubious good like a B.S. degree—pun intended.

The saga began in 1969 when Willie Griggs, a black man born in the segregated South, decided he was overdue for a promotion. In order to get one, per Duke Power Electric Company rules, he had to pass two aptitude tests and possess a high school diploma. Griggs smelled racism. The tests surveyed employees on basic math and intelligence questions. None of Duke’s fourteen black workers passed. Griggs and twelve others sued the company for discrimination. A district court and federal appeals court accepted Duke’s claim that the tests were designed to ensure that the plant operated safely. Duke bolstered its case by pointing out that it offered to pay for employees to obtain high school diplomas and that white applicants who failed to meet the requirements were also denied promotions.

http://spectator.org/articles/60741/how-supreme-court-created-student-loan-bubble

-----------------------------------------------

oops sorry Brant wrong article

Says Professor Janet Halley, one of the Harvard Twenty-Eight, “It’s a totally secret process, in which real genuine unfairness can happen, and it’s so airtight that no one would know” if it were to happen. According to an op-ed piece signed by Harvard’s heroic Twenty-Eight and posted online in the Boston Globe, “Harvard has adopted procedures [in its recently adopted sexual misconduct policy] for deciding cases of alleged sexual misconduct which lack the most basic elements of fairness and due process, are overwhelmingly stacked against the accused, and are in no way required” by the Department of Education’s anti-discrimination law.

http://spectator.org/articles/60729/harvard-twenty-eight-rescue

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now