if this was in my town i would have wanted the city to scrap the test, make a new one so that each race was promoted at a significant rate. i dont want my tax money going to fight some stupid suit. especially when i think that written tests are a stupid way to promote firefighters (of course, ive never even known one)
ummm huh? so you don't want the best people for the job, you just want to maintain racial equity? Please someone hire this guy to run the East Baton Rouge Parish School system. The test was 60/40 written/verbal. I would assume that the written was all procedure and code enforcement. If they can't pass the written, why would they deserve a promotion?
And just how exactly do you create such a test that will allow each race to be promoted? The test is the test, the competition isn't against other people or races, it is who is taking the test and THE TEST. You either know it or you don't. Good grief, what exactly are you saying? Should they have made it easier?
My question to all the people questioning the validity of the test: Did you read the case to get the facts? The company that created the test went well out of their way to ensure that the test would not be racially biased. The took from an unusually large sample of minorities when working to create the written portion of the exam and 2/3 of the judges sitting in on the panel for the verbal portion of the test were minorities along with a slew of other things they did. Please read the facts of the case before just saying the test was biased because the end statistics said it was.
Someone needs to tell that hag Biddy Ginsberg. In her opinion a 60% written test is not a good way to choose a fire officer and the simple fact not enough minorities passed constitutes, in her oipinion, disparate practice as outlined under Title VII. I urge everyone to read her opinion located here: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/08pdf/07-1428.pdf Her citing all the cases from the early 70's is laughable since this case isnt remotely close to those. Her argument even includes a case where a power company required a high school diploma as a qualification for a job which seems reasonable on the surface. However, not enough minorities had diploma's or the same access to get dimploma's back then and it was found that requirement was in violation of Title VII. Today that would be an impossible argument to make but this case was from 1971 and probably a valid concern but to use it in this argument is a fuggin joke. Here are a couple quotes that pretty much sum up Biddy's thinking. Ginsberg has outlived her usefulness on the court. She is basing her opinions on a society that scantly resembles the cases she cites and the mind set she portrays.
It was a tough call for the town, they were going to get sued either way. But the court made an important finding--you can't use racial discrimination to address racial discrimination. There were once racial biases in tests in the 60's, but since the 70's court-approved, independent, multiracial review boards scrupulously remove any such biases from the tests. If anyone doesn't score high on it, then he hasn't worked hard enough or isn't bright enough for the job. The city can address the issue of low black promotion in other ways. It can create a class where applicants for promotion can study and get tutoring before the tests. But the tests mean nothing if they aren't graded fairly, which means "color blind".
dont spend my tax money on d-bag lawyers (anymore than it already is). sometimes for important things i suppose its unavoidable, but not for stupid things like promotion tests. hell, im in an academic field and no one promotes by some testing. its a stupid way to promote. promote by on the job evaluations (the way it was done before lawyers got their hands on it) and make individuals sue if they dont like it. most should never go to trial because supervisors would be assured that they would lose their job.
I'm pretty sure it is required by the charter of the city or something like that to be considered for promotion, they have to take a test. The 60/40 was collectively bargained." I get what your saying, I think it is stupid too, but they were only doing what was required of them per the laws and cba's.
Did it ever cross your mind that a written test just might be the best way to evaluate? Hmm lets see, next time you are on the interstate look at a few of the big rigs. Those triangle placards have numbers and symbols on them. Thats because should they catch on fire, you might want to know what is inside before you start blasting it with high pressure hoses. So under your method, instead of a written scenario, they should take a truck load of explosives and set it on fire to see who puts it out the right way? An overblown example (no pun intended) but an example none the less. You can't replicate many of the different situations that they may be required to handle in a practical excercise so the written exam makes plenty sense.
The root cause of this entire mess is the bastardization of equal opportunity. I totally support equal opportunity. But opportunity aint what it used to be. It used to mean "you get to enter the contest". Now it means "you automatically win". I pray that the country finds a center position in all this before I croak. It'd be nice to have race and gender be a non-issue when it comes to this kind of stuff. But, because folks insist on making it an issue, it remains an issue.
