Judges orders millions paid in NYC firefighter bias case

[46Young]

From the list #6019 candidates, the ones who had their list thrown out:

http://meritmattersusa.blogspot.com/

The main problem with this case is that Judge Garaufis rules that the #6019 test resulted in a "disparate impact." What that means is that no matter how fair, well intentioned, and unbiased a hiring process/test may be, is is presumably discriminatory if the results are unfavorable for the protected class in question.

This judge said that he would allow hiring off of the #6019 list so long as the city used one of several options he presented for future hiring processes. The problem was, each one implemented a form or quota hiring, which is by definition discriminatory.

Basically, either we're all equal or we're not. Especially in a field such as firefighting, it's dangerous to lower hiring standards to include the lowest common denominator, be it by physical standards or intellectual. Firefighting isn't for everyone. Any time a quota is implemented, someone always experiences discrimination.

It's just that some people feel that they're more equal than others.

Also, whenever someone says "x % of employees are one class, but y % are employed, that's dicriminatory," I stop reading or paying attention. Again, in a fair hiring process, it ought to be the best person for the job, not to mirror the population, or to rebalance past ethnic divisions. That's inherently unfair and discriminatory to any future applicants, who had nothing to do with past hiring processes.

Here's DC Paul Mannix's take on racial makeups of various NYC agencies:

http://meritmattersusa.blogspot.com/2010/08/still-another-racial-double.html

http://meritmattersusa.blogspot.com/2012/01/making-new-yorks-agencies-look-like-new.html

Never mind that list #6019 was the most fair and unbiased test in FDNY history, and had much more favorable results regarding racial makeup.

 

[46Young]

When we say "lowering standards", let's define standards. Should criminals, delinquents, slackers or the like be able to slip through the cracks? Absolutely not! Can we look objectively at each applicant outside of their respective test scores? I think so.

Situations like this tend to perpetuate the notion that meeting hiring quotas, for underrepresented populations, will open the floodgates to literally anyone with a pulse, who are for the most part ignorant. This is folly, and couldn't be further from the reality of the situation. That argument assumes that minority applicants that do poorly on entrance exams are uneducated and not fit for the job.

It has been stated that the non-minority applicants were receiving "assistance" prior to taking the examination. I'm curious as to what that entailed. Maybe study/review materials... or potentially the entire exam? I'd be interested in seeing how applicants (both white and non-white) fared on the exam, if given the exact same pre-exam support.

There is no easy solution to suspect/established discriminatory hiring practices, as they often disenfranchise some particular group, no matter which way the pendulum swings. I would beg the question, how is the greater good better served? I would err on the side of more diverse ethnic workplace, even at the expense of offending the sensibilities (and sense of entitlement) of those intent on maintaining the status-quo.





Affirmative Action was not created in a vacuum.

Funny thing - I was at work one night, chatting with 20-somethings nurses when I made a reference to Apartheid... silence and blank stares ensued. Mind you, these RNs are college educated and had no idea what I was talking about, and quite frankly, couldn't care less.

Point being this: The general American populace, at times, has the memory of a common housefly. Especially when it comes to unsavory eras of history that would rather be forgotten. Police and Fire departments have been historically notorious for overtly and deliberately denying minorities from entering their ranks... let's not even start in on institutions of higher learning.

Recent evidence of the Vulcans discriminating against white applicants during a test prep session:

http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/03...fter-being-denied-entry-to-preparation-class/

For list # 6019, the catering was not for the whites. Recruiting was heavy in minority neighborhoods, minority applicants were picked up in vans and such to be brought to testing. Also, the test was couldn't have been any easier. If you google the test, you can see for yourself. It's not like they were featuring questions in calculus and such.

 

[46Young]

Where did you come up with that idea? Affirmative Action is far from flawless, but to label it as racism just shows a fundamental lack of understanding of what racism is and the ideology behind it.

AA had it's place at one time, but now there are laws and legal precedent that ensure fair hiring practices. Any time a quota is instituted, someone else is discrminated against through no fault of their own. Fair and unbiased hiring, where the most qualified candidate wins the position, is the only true way to run a selection process.

 

[Veneficus]

Basically, either we're all equal or we're not. Especially in a field such as firefighting, it's dangerous to lower hiring standards to include the lowest common denominator, be it by physical standards or intellectual. Firefighting isn't for everyone. Any time a quota is implemented, someone always experiences discrimination..

It is not that I disagree with this statement, it is that the actual process for hiring firefighters all around the country gives unfair advantage to a certain group.

The whole written, agility, and bonus points for various issues is not fair.

What is fair is a standard test with an unmodified score, certification by a physician a person is fit for duty, and a no bonus points for anything from any group.

Only then is it fair.

But it is going to make weeding out a few thousand applicants rather time consuming. So unfairnessis accepted in the interest of time and money.

Choosing people you want is not unique to the fire service. Doctors do it. Lawyers do it. Tradesmen do it.

EMS does it.

(how often have you heard the phrase "I won't pass anyone who isn't fit to work on my family.")

I get called unfit by a subculture of EMS providers on a regular basis.

Some of my favorites are:

Not follow protocol like a check list
Not driving fast enough in adverse conditions
Not sounding panicky enough when calling med control
On this very forum I have been called a menace to patients and providers
Falsely "accused" of being gay.

There is always going to be some level of discrimination in any workforce. But I submit it is based on cultural identification, not by skin color alone.

 

[johnrsemt]

There was an issue for awhile with a dispatcher: she was hired because she was black and female. She obviously had major coaching ahead of time because she passed the tests; didn't score as high as others but she was hired because of the extra 20 points given due to being black and female.

She was dislexic; she would see the address that the call taker would put on the system and then mis dispatch it. She was suspended and fired multiple times due to it; threatened to get a lawyer; and even got a lawyer; they were forced to rehire her each time and give her back pay.
Now basically she sits around and does nothing and gets paid for it. For the last 3 or 4 years.

But the area had to hire her; because they didn't have enough minorities in dispatch; she was the only one that applied at that time; so she got the job.


So yes; at one point AA and the judges were good for some things; but in some ways the system (and the people the system serves) gets screwed because of it.

 

[46Young]

It is not that I disagree with this statement, it is that the actual process for hiring firefighters all around the country gives unfair advantage to a certain group.

The whole written, agility, and bonus points for various issues is not fair.

What is fair is a standard test with an unmodified score, certification by a physician a person is fit for duty, and a no bonus points for anything from any group.

Only then is it fair.

But it is going to make weeding out a few thousand applicants rather time consuming. So unfairnessis accepted in the interest of time and money.

Choosing people you want is not unique to the fire service. Doctors do it. Lawyers do it. Tradesmen do it.

EMS does it.

(how often have you heard the phrase "I won't pass anyone who isn't fit to work on my family.")

I get called unfit by a subculture of EMS providers on a regular basis.

Some of my favorites are:

Not follow protocol like a check list
Not driving fast enough in adverse conditions
Not sounding panicky enough when calling med control
On this very forum I have been called a menace to patients and providers
Falsely "accused" of being gay.

There is always going to be some level of discrimination in any workforce. But I submit it is based on cultural identification, not by skin color alone.

I have seen hiring being tailored towards the white male in some places. In others, it's obvious that protected classes are getting assistance. For example, some departments had components of their agility test that including placing and picking up objects from a high ledge. That was removed so that more "vertically challenged" applicants could pass the test. I can agree with that. What I don't agree with is adopting the CPAT, which in my opinion is an inappropriately easy course. Not everyone has the physical ability or potential to be a FF.

FDNY used to require two years of college to apply. Then it was one. Now, I think it's one semester or six month's work Hx. The "backdoor" EMS to FF promotion was instituted. These measures were implemented to increase qualified minority candidates - less minorities were likely to have college, and FDNY EMS is much more minority heavy than FDNY suppression. What's more, the Vulcans are pushing for those with NYC H.S. diplomas to get extra points, since most of the whites were applying from outside the city.