$8)$ Reverse Discrimination: "Reverse discrimination" is a controversial concept for two main reasons. First, protected classes include all races, genders, and sexual orientations, not just those who have been historically discriminated against. Therefore, if a white, heterosexual male were denied a job opportunity based on his race, gender, or sexual orientation, it would be discrimination. The adjective reverse is not needed. Second, empirical data like: Reverse discrimination is a form of unjust discrimination that is not morally objectionable. This chapter argues that affirmative action is not unjust discrimination in a generic sense, as it involves discrimination in a specific sense, such as unjust differential treatment of people due to their socially salient groups. If affirmative action involves discrimination in a generic sense, it is not morally objectionable. Conversely, if all forms of affirmative action involve discrimination in this sense, it is not unjust discrimination, making affirmative action not unjust discrimination, and studies like: Case Study: $$Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination.$$ A study conducted in Boston and Chicago found significant racial discrimination in the labor market. Participants were assigned fictitious resumes to help$-$wanted ads in newspapers, with each name assigned either a very African American or very White sounding name. The results showed that white names received $50\%$ more callbacks for interviews and that race affected the benefits of a better resume. Applicants living in better neighborhoods received more callbacks, but this effect did not differ by race. The discrimination was uniform across occupations and industries, with federal contractors and employers who listed 'Equal Opportunity Employer' in their ads also discriminating. The study found little evidence that employers inferred other factors, such as social class, from the names. Show that this type of discrimination rarely occurs. There is an abundance of anecdotal evidence on this issue, which is data based on personal, subjective narratives that have not been vetted for accuracy, authenticity, or bias. These anecdotes often involve an alleged victim presuming they were the most qualified person for a job without knowing the qualifications or soft skills of other candidates. However, in $2009$ the Supreme Court decided the Ricci v$.$ DeStefano case where white and Hispanic firefighters sued the city of New Haven, Connecticut for discarding the results of a promotion exam because not enough minority candidates scored well. The Court ruled in favor of the firefighters, deciding that the city's actions constituted reverse discrimination in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. Adding to the controversy is the $2023$ case Students for Fair Admissions v$.$ Harvard, which essentially declared that almost all Affirmative Action policies for college admissions are unconstitutional. Although the Harvard case doesn't specifically apply to workplaces, it has had a chilling effect on workplace DEI initiatives at corporations nationwide.

$-$Please consider the above information and context provided to answer the following questions toughly and succinctly in a well develop paragraph. A$)$In a well$-$developed paragraph that demonstrates critical thinking skills, please say if the individual believe reverse discrimination is a real issue in modern$-$day workplaces. B$)$Why or why not?