In
FY 2005 the feds fired or retired 4,179 white guys. At the same
time, the feds managed to hire 6,238 new preferred minorities.
[June 14, 2006 -- Washington, DC] Today Adversity.Net released it's sixth annual
report of federal over hiring of selected minorities. Our report is based upon the
U.S. Office of Personnel Management's (OPM's) annual report to Congress "Federal
Equal Opportunity Recruitment Program" (FEORP).
|
Of course, OPM doesn't call it "over hiring" of minorities. They call it
"meeting or exceeding affirmative action goals." According to the
feds' own statistics, equal opportunity recruitment is almost all about blacks. To a
far lesser extent, of course, it also benefits other preferred groups such as Hispanics,
Asian Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans. But the overwhelming beneficiaries of
"affirmative action" in the federal government are are, and have always been,
blacks. |
| Adversity.Net supports all of our assertions in this article with the
government's own statistics. In the interest of full disclosure, we have published
all of our computations and assumptions, as well as the detailed government data which we
used in arriving at our conclusions. See particularly Definitions
and Computations |
|
Synopsis:
The feds have over hired blacks by such an overwhelming margin in all 22 independent
federal agencies that it is difficult to see the over-quota hiring of the other
minorities.
Above: Top three independent agencies for
Blacks vs. all other minorities. |
For example, in the
graphic to the left, while the EEOC hired Hispanics by 98% above their racial quota, that accomplishment is
dwarfed by the 427% by which blacks were over hired by EEOC.
Blacks were over hired at the Court
Services and Offender Services agency by 841%. And at the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation by 405%. |
|
|
Above: Top three executive departments for
Blacks vs. all other minorities. |
The situation is
similar in the 18 federal executive departments.
The Dept. of
Education over hired
blacks by 333% over their proportion in the available labor pool (which the feds call
"the Relevant Civilian Labor Force", or RCLF.)
The Dept. of Housing
and Urban Development
over hired blacks by 334% over their proportion in the available labor pool.
And the Veterans
Administration over
hired blacks by 148%. |
Anti-White-Male
Bias:
The pattern of anti-white-male bias in favor of black preferences has been extremely
consistent over the past several years during which we have analyzed the OPM's racial
hiring data. While OPM has studiously avoided posting any explicit data about the
impact of these policies upon non-preferred groups such as white males, OPM has not been
able to keep itself from letting slip little semantic and statistical hints about it's
anti-white and anti-white-male bias.
Here are the few anti-white, boastful, racial factoids we have gleaned just from the
introductions and executive summaries of the past several years' OPM reports:
| In FY 2005 ... The feds fired or retired 4,179 white
guys.
But the feds hired 6,238
new minorities. |
|
The executive
summary to the OPM report states that in FY 2005 the federal workforce increased by only
2,059 but that federal minority hiring increased by 6,238. By our math, that means
that 6,238 new minorities minus 2,059 new jobs = 4,179 whites were "unhired" by
the feds in FY 2005.
Stated another way: the feds hired 6,238 minorities and fired or retired 4,179 white guys.
-- Source: FEORP FY 2005, Page 5 at para. 5 |
| In FY 2004 ... 56% of new fed jobs were filled by minorities.
Only 44% of new fed jobs were
filled by "whites". |
|
Of the 37,595
new federal jobs created in FY2004 21,078 of them -- 56% -- were filled by minorities.
Only 44% of new federal jobs in FY 2004 were filled by "whites".
-- Source: FEORP FY 2004, Page 9 at para. 6 |
| In FY 2003 ... While fed employment declined by 6,665 this year, the
feds had a net gain of 864 new minority employees.
One suspects that means that there
was a net loss of 5,801 whites. |
|
"The
permanent Federal Workforce ... declined by 6,665 from 1,515,345 in FY 2002 to 1,508,680
in FY 2003.
"Despite the overall decrease ... the FY 2003 FEORP report shows that ... minorities
in the Federal workforce increased from 470,827 (31.1 percent) in 2002 to 471,691 (31.3
percent) in 2003." [471,691 minus 470,827 = 864 more minorities. Editor]
That means that 6,665 (the amount of the overall reduction) minus 864 more minorities =
5,801 whites (or white males) were "unhired" by the feds in FY 2003.
-- Source: FY 2003 FEORP, p. 9 at para. 3 |
| In FY 2001 ... In FY 2001 the feds created 12,310 new jobs.
Fewer than 23 out of 100 of these
new jobs (23%) were awarded to whites and/or other "non-minorities". |
|
The OPM
Director in 2002, Kay Coles James, introduced the FY 2001 report with the following
statement: "The FY 2001 FEORP report shows that minority employment in the Federal
workforce increased during the last year (up by 9,490, which is significant in the context
of overall workforce growth of 12,310)." In other words 12,310 new
federal jobs were created during FY 2001 but only 2,820 of this total -- 22.9% -- were
filled by white males and/or other "non-minorities".
That means that fewer than 23 jobs out of every 100 new Federal jobs were filled by
non-minorities in FY 2001.
-- Source: FY 2001 FEORP, p. 3 |
No where in this year's entire 50 page report does the OPM include any explicit data
whatsoever regarding the hiring or promotion of white males by the feds. But by
reading between the lines -- as in those little statistical slip-ups, above -- one can
accurately infer that the feds' mission is to reduce the number of white males
employed by the federal government.
"Women" as a
Disadvantaged Group:
As always, the OPM's data regarding "women" is confounding, and one must presume
that is deliberately so.
All of OPM's minority data pertaining to specific races (Hispanic, black or Native
American, for example) include both women and men of that race. In context, that is
a reasonable grouping of data.
However, what is unreasonable is OPM's separate category "women" which includes all
women from all minority categories and "white" (non-minority)
women. I believe this is due to the federal government's desire to further obfuscate
the impact of "Federal Equal Employment Opportunity" upon whites regardless of
gender.
Missing (Omitted) White Data:
What is more unreasonable, even unconscionable, is the fact that OPM continues to refuse
this year, as in preceding years, to publish detailed data regarding either the growth or
the shrinkage of the proportion of whites, and particularly white males, in the federal
work force. That glaring omission leads a reasonable person to assume that the feds
are trying to hide something ... such as the fact that they are systematically reducing
the number of whites and particularly white males from government employment. If
that is not the case, then why do they refuse to publish data pertaining to white
employment?
Adversity.Net encourages our readers to thoroughly and critically examine all of
the government's data, as well as our own computations, all of which we have openly
published in these pages. If there are flaws in our analysis we encourage you to
tell us about it.
For those of you who may remain skeptical about the government's true intentions regarding
"affirmative action" (a.k.a. racial quotas), please be sure to see our Five Best Agencies for Minorities page,
and also particularly our Blacks in the
Federal Workforce page.
-- Tim Fay, Editor
Download the entire,
original 2006 OPM report with charts and graphs in Acrobat PDF format:
http://adversity.net/fed_stats/OPM2006/feorp2005.pdf
(File size is approx. 361 KB)
Update August 2006: GAO Recommends Against Counting Hispanics Who Are
NOT U.S. Citizens!
| The U.S. Government
Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report to Congress stating in substantial part the
following:
The EEOC and the U.S. Office of Personnel Management should discontinue
their practice of counting non-citizen Hispanics in the Civilian Labor Force (CLF).
After all, as GAO helpfully points out in their report, the federal government does not
hire non-citizens except in extremely rare instances.
Furthermore, GAO reports that when U.S. citizenship and level of education are taken into
account, Hispanics are 24% MORE likely to be federal employees than
non-Hispanics!
Victory!? Vindication? We'll see. So far, according to GAO's report,
both the EEOC and OPM have turned up their noses at the GAO's Aug. 2006 report, but change
and rational thought may be in the wind! Read all about the GAO Report. |
See the August 2006 GAO report which strongly recommends that the feds STOP counting
non-citizen Hispanics in calculating racial quotas.
See our Report |
Top
 |
More FY 2005 Charts and Excerpts: Federal Minority
Employment |
| END: A. Minority Hiring OVERVIEW |
|
|