No. Anti-discrimination scholars. Point is not that reservations are bad, but affirmative action is not effective if we base it on the "equal outcomes" idea. It should begin at the root of the issue: when they are children, provide adequate healthcare, good schooling, childcare, etc. Which requires far more commitment than some puny quota which can be manipulated according to anybody's whims and fancies.

Diversity Hires are a joke.

They hire some Black people - for photos. Almost all American Companies take Black people - a few of them for the sake of telling that Black Lives Matter and all that corporate slogans.

But the issue is,

In India - by the way a person looks we can't identify thier caste. So it doesn't serve the Corporate photoOp agenda.

Also look at the credentials of the diversity hires, which are often better if not equivalent to their foreign counterparts because they have to compensate for being a diversity hire. That element is crucial to how institutions, even rights-progressive ones, can manage to function profitably.

The last time I read the constitution of India, reservation was not a fundamental right of citizens. It however is mentioned in part IV, but it is the prerogative of the state (and not a right), and the state can in the interest of equality and promotion of interest of backward classes create such affirmative action as may be necessary. But it is definitely not a right. After 1000 years, if Parliament of India is convinced that the societal fabric of India has now evolved to one of equality and no caste based differences exist anymore, it can totally negate all resrvations and make it zero percent. No one can then move the Supreme court and say it is our right to have reservation.

Private foreign companies will run away from India if they start reservation in private sector. It is so simple, tomorrow if I open a company I would want the best talented people to do my job, why would I hire a quota person if I know there is a better more meritorious candidate for the same job?? A government invoking quota is understandable, but asking a private company to entertain a notion as reservation, which at the end is social prerogative of the state, is simply unfathomable.

Private reservation (if it ever happens) will be a bane for post liberalization growth of India. Foreign companies would shudder before opening an office in India. There is already a massive brain drain from India, now if you take private sector jobs also from the youth of India and apply a 50 or 60 percent reservation there, the talented youth will just run away! There will be complete disillusionment with the system.

It is long settled that the best way to support any marginalised class is to create a level playing field at least when it comes to tuition, coaching, schooling, vocational and professional training and degrees. Give scholarships there to backward people. Hell even educate them for free. Give them free hostel stays. The state should use all the taxpayers money to subsidise everything they can for marginalized groups. And once they have the required skillsets, education and grooming they will be at the same level of merit as any general candidate. That is the right way to go. And yes Indira Sawhney has to be revisited and a limit need to be drawn, otherwise these politicians will make a hell hole of our country in the name of reservation. Everything has a limit. Where do you draw the line..at 60 percent? At 70? At 80? At 90???? Where?. Even the most ardent supporter of reservation if he/she is remotely just will say that yes there NEEDS to be a limit!

I think in the MP case that OP has quoted it is just mentioned that sc st communities should be given due representation and it is not a mandatory percentage rule that they have notified. Reservation to locals is becoming common in private sector. But it is general and not caste specific. And secondly it is mostly prescribed for fourth grade jobs or those with some ceiling salary for eg for a salary less than Rs. 10,000 which does not need a professional expertise.

It's been like this for a while now (MP's total quotas were around 85% before the HC stayed), political parties agitate and promise quotas to groups if they get elected and then the judiciary puts a stop to this burlesque. The concern should be the judiciary's increasing propensity to compromise constitutional principals and tolerate extra legal concords. On top of this, endless litigation keeps nagging the judiciary until they say yes (navtej johar ect.).

This country will soon become shit if this happens. Reservation shouldn't be promoted at the cost of efficiency. Development demands merit not some random representation. Do you think a guy who barely knows physics will do any better as a scientist? Hogwash. To a certain point it is acceptable, but not here.

Given how government jobs are either declining or growing very slowly, a large number of politicians have been keen to introduce caste-based reservations in the private sector, both in education as well as in jobs. The first step towards such quotas, albeit a bit hesitant, however, appears to have been taken in Madhya Pradesh. Like many other states, Madhya Pradesh’s policy on MSMEs that avail of some government benefit, like low-cost land or some tax-holiday, requires that the bulk of jobs (in this case, 70%) be reserved for locals; whether this can actually be implemented, though, is a different question. In the case of Gujarat, despite having an 85% reservation for locals, there is a very large proportion of migrant workers in many industries.

What makes the Madhya Pradesh policy different, a report in The Indian Express points out, is that the MSMEs that get these benefits must also ensure that SC/ST/OBCs get representation; the policy does not mention any reservations for the EWS upper-castes, though. It is, however, not clear how stringently this provision will be implemented, and how much time local firms will get to implement it in full. What is clear, though, is that this is the thin end of the wedge, and over time, other states could also start implementing such a policy. In the case of farm loan waivers, for instance, once prime minister Narendra Modi promised these in the run-up to the Uttar Pradesh assembly poll, it was followed by a rash of similar promises by other states. And, in the case of quotas, while a 50% ceiling that emanated from the Indra Sawhney judgment was taken to be the laxman rekha for decades, once states like Maharashtra came up with a Maratha quota, other states ended up following suit; Madhya Pradesh raised the OBC quota from 14% to 27% some months ago. Indeed, by introducing the 10% quota for economically weak upper castes, the central government, too, decided to ignore the cap prescribed by the Indra Sawhney judgment. Put another way, there is nothing to stop the spread of a bad idea. That is why, it is very important that this new law be challenged at the earliest since the boundaries of reservations are constantly being tested; sadly, the courts have not resisted this. Indeed, they have aided the spread of reservation—in the case of reservations in promotions or in higher education, for instance—on many occasions.