Earlier quoted context omitted.
> because the CEO was intentionally using neutral rules of hiring that ended in "discriminatory" results. Against what baseline? The results are only discriminatory against a baseline in which affirmative action is baked in. But this can't be the proper baseline, because if it is then any amount of affirmative action can be called into question. Does your company practice some affirmative action? That has a disparate…
Based on studies (ie: resumes with different names, etc.) the baseline is for hiring decisions to be racially motivated against minorities.
Those are flawed studies, as different names is as much a class distinction as a racial one. Even if it were true, however, a white candidate will on average be better than a black candidate with the same resume, because the white candidate had to pass higher standards to get into the same university.