Comparisons of affirmative action in employment for people with disabilities in Malaysia and the United States

Affirmative action is a step taken by government that formed for the purpose of removing barriers, past discrimination and avoid present discrimination in every aspect of life, i.e. employment, education, or contracting with certain groups of people for services which usually involves minority groups. This research compares the policies of affirmative action in government and private sectors for employment of people with disabilities in Malaysia and the United States. The methodology used in this research is analyzing relevant documents such as journal articles, conference proceedings, books, government documents, and national data. Affirmative action in Malaysia is based on a quota scheme, while there is no history of quota scheme in the United States Malaysia has specified a 1% employment quota for people with disabilities in government and private sectors under the legislation of the Service Circular Letter No. 3/2008 (for government sector) and Code of Practice of Employment for People with Disabilities in Private Sector 2001 (for private sector). Implementation of affirmative action in the government sector began in 1988 under Service Circular Letter No. 10/1988 and was renewed in 2008. In the United States, affirmative action in employment for people with disabilities is stated in the Rehabilitation Act 1973, Section 501 (for government sector) and Section 503 (for private sector). The target of affirmative action in Malaysia has not yet been reached even though it has been implemented for more than 20 years. The purpose of comparing both affirmative action policies, Malaysia and the United States, to see how they are similar and different and to suggest steps that can be taken to improve the situation in Malaysia. The results of this research show that implementation of affirmative action requires four vital elements in order to function effectively which are plans, monitors, services, and consequences. In comparing the affirmative action, it is realized that affirmative action in Malaysia contains plans, monitors, and services. The element of "consequences" that involve penalties has not yet been added. The "consequences" element is as important as other elements for the success of affirmative action as it causes employers to take serious action to implement affirmative action. It is suggested that Malaysia include the "consequences" element such as practicing the quota-levy system instead of a binding quota scheme.