It would be sheer coincidence if the availability of protected class PhDs coincided with the university's research and teaching needs. Nonetheless, the university has managed not only to meet but to exceed its diversity goal. Professor Chavez has reached the wrong conclusion because he has misused the numbers. He takes newly minted PhDs as his standard for utilization, but then compares them to the distribution of tenured faculty. These numbers suggest but do not prove preferential treatment.
More direct evidence comes from the policies and pronouncements of the administration.
Here I will focus on a recent one which may appear petty but which clearly illustrates the administration's attitude toward diversity considerations in the promotion and tenure process. Instead of ensuring that all faculty are judged by the same standards, and that women and minority faculty are not especially burdened by service work, we are now rewarding departments for treating women and minorities as special groups with special responsibilities and special rewards. Such policies are futile attempts to do an end-run around the problem of discrimination. If discrimination on campus is as pervasive as Professor Chavez suggests, let's identify it and stamp it out. It is for exactly that reason that we have numerous diversity policies which are not in any way designed to confront discrimination.