WASHINGTON, USA — President Donald Trump signed an executive order rescinding a nearly 60-year-old anti-discrimination rule for government contractors in his first week in office.
The order mandates employers to certify that they do not engage in what he termed “illegal” Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) programmes.
The rule Trump rescinded, originally introduced by President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1965 as Executive Order 11246, prohibited government contractors from discriminating in hiring, firing, promotions, or pay practices.
The order applied to businesses employing about one-quarter of the U.S. workforce and was seen as a cornerstone of efforts to promote workplace equality.
Trump’s new order also directs federal agencies to identify up to nine organisations—including publicly traded companies, large non-profits, and major foundations—for investigation into DEI practices that may be deemed discriminatory.
Targeting DEI Initiatives
Trump framed the new policy as a push for “merit-based” employment practices, stating that his order would ensure hiring and promotions are based on “individual initiative, skills, performance, and hard work,” rather than “DEI-related factors, goals, policies, mandates, or requirements.”
Critics, however, warn that rescinding the Johnson-era rule could discourage businesses from pursuing diversity initiatives for fear of being targeted under the new certification process.
Jocelyn Frye, president of the National Partnership for Women & Families, said the move would embolden employers hesitant to promote diversity.
“Those who have been more reticent and reluctant [to conduct outreach] will get the message that all bets are off, and you can do whatever you want,” she said.
A Legacy of Enforcement
The rescinded Executive Order 11246 was unique in its approach to combating workplace discrimination.
It required government contractors to submit annual data on hiring and employment practices, which could lead to investigations by the Department of Labor.
These investigations often uncovered discriminatory practices even when affected employees were unaware.
The Labour Department found that about one-quarter of cases of discrimination uncovered under the rule involved white males, highlighting its focus on fairness rather than quotas.
Former Labour Department official Craig Leen, who oversaw the rule during much of Trump’s first term, defended efforts to promote diversity, stating that merit-based hiring requires active outreach.
“You can’t have everyone hired by word-of-mouth and they all happen to be [white] men,” he said.
“If you want to do merit-based hiring, you need to audit yourself every year and ensure equal opportunities for women and minorities.”
Fewer Checks Without EO 11246
Without the reporting and investigatory powers granted by EO 11246, experts caution there will be fewer mechanisms to uncover and address workplace discrimination.
Frye pointed out that Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act prohibits discrimination but does not require employers to disclose hiring data or practices.
“You have to know about it to file a complaint about it,” she said. “This erodes the government’s ability to proactively ensure compliance.”
David Fortney, a Labour Department official under President George W. Bush, warned that Trump’s replacement order could have a chilling effect on businesses seeking to implement diversity programmes.
“Employers now have to certify they do not have an illegal DEI programme, but the term ‘illegal’ is undefined within the order,” he said.
“This uncertainty is already causing concern among employers who value a diverse workforce but fear running afoul of the new rules.”
A Broader Cultural Shift
Trump’s action is part of a broader push to eliminate DEI practices across federal agencies and contractors.
Pete Hegseth, Trump’s newly appointed Secretary of Defence, has already pledged to remove “woke” policies from the military, signalling a top-down approach to scaling back diversity initiatives.
Critics argue that this shift could undermine decades of progress in creating more inclusive workplaces.
“The very businesses that have embraced diversity because they know it improves results may now feel compelled to back away,” said Fortney.
As the new executive order takes effect, its impact on the private sector and the broader economy remains to be seen.
Advocates for workplace diversity fear it marks a regression in the fight for equality, while supporters see it as a return to what they view as merit-based fairness.
The rescission of EO 11246 has raised questions about the balance between government oversight and employer autonomy in fostering a fair and equitable workforce, setting the stage for potential legal and societal battles in the months to come.
