has affirmative action gone too far?

DeletedUser

this was a story on my local news the other day

Supreme Court hears NH
firefighter case
Updated: Wednesday, 22 Apr 2009, 7:17 PM EDT
Published : Wednesday, 22 Apr 2009, 5:34 AM EDT

New Haven (AP) - A case involving 20 New Haven firefighters went before the U.S. Supreme Court today. The reverse discrimination lawsuit claims that the city of New Haven scrapped a promotion exam because too few minorities passed the test.



The New Haven 20 claim that their civil rights were violated when the city threw out the test results.

The city says if they had gone ahead with the promotions based on the test results, they would have risked a lawsuit because the exams had a "disparate impact" on minorities in violation of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

The plaintiff's lawyer, Karen Torre, disagrees saying, "The only thing wrong with this test was it did not suit the political agenda of New Haven's mayor."

Outside court following the arguments, the lead plaintiff, Frank Ricci, said little.

"The only thing I'll say at this time is I speak for all of us. We're happy to have our day in court," he said.

Minority groups across the nation support the city's decision to throw out the tests results and were also on hand to see how the justices weighed the case.

It is important for this court to stand where the nation is today, where this nation is on a path to meaningful, equal participation," said Marc Morial, Pres., National Urban League.

The court's conservative judges seemed to side with the white firefighters. "You had some applicants who were winners and their promotion was set aside," Justice Antonin Scalia said.

Justice David Souter said a ruling against the city could leave employers in a "damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't situation."

The federal appeals court in New York upheld a lower court ruling dismissing the lawsuit.


if you would like a link here it is http://www.wtnh.com/dpp/news/news_w...hears_new_haven_firefighter_case_200904220533
 
Last edited by a moderator:
nashy19

nashy19

Nashy (as himself)
There shouldn't be any law based on hiring the most qualified people for a job, and if there is it's far less likely to be enforced, where as obvious racism is highly likely to be acted on.
 

DeletedUser

nashy19 said:
There shouldn't be any law based on hiring the most qualified people for a job, and if there is it's far less likely to be enforced, where as obvious racism is highly likely to be acted on.
Click to expand...

There shouldn't be any racism in our society, either...

Of course, since there is and since racism (and sexism) has historically and continues to be a factor in hiring...an imperfect solution may well be better than an unaddressed problem.
 

DeletedUser

Okay, so all the courts, all the way up to the Federal Supreme Court (with a decidedly conservative majority), decided to dismiss the case. Gizmo, what first caught me about the article you presented is that it has no attribution. AP stands for Associated Press. I chased the original articles, by Jesse Washington and Mark Sherman, which are far more detailed than the snippet you linked. In fact it is rewritten (and in an op-ed manner), which is a copyright infringement.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/S/SCOTUS_FIREFIGHTERS_LAWSUIT
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_SCOTUS_FIREFIGHTERS_LAWSUIT

This is a 6 year old case. What it comes down to is that all the courts decided (either unanimously or majorily) the test did not fairly measure field aptitude, especially since most of it was written, and that scholastic aptitude was far less valued in the field of firefighting. There's more, but you can review the above articles, or research the cases individually.

Ricci v. DeStefano, 07-1428
Ricci v. DeStefano, 08-328
 

DeletedUser

What are you suggesting Hellstromm?
Should we actually research things properly before forming opinions and making snap decisions?:eek:hmy:
If only more people did that, imagine how many mistakes and conflicts could be avoided.
Democracy might actually lead to sound government too.:laugh:
 

DeletedUser

George, what a radical idea! Are you suggesting that people base their opinions on something other than disinfotainment? Shocking!
 

DeletedUser

the problem I have with afirmative action is that it causes a culture of "fill the quota" and the minority status becomes more important than the actual credentials . I've also seen the argument that afirmative action is racist because it asumes that a black,hispanic etc wouldent get the job if it wasent for afirmative action .
 

DeletedUser

As a black man in his early thirties, my attitude towards so-called affirmative action is fairly ambivalent. Clearly I do want to be appointed into positions on the basis my abilities rather than the colour of my skin. I am fairly well educated with both a BSc and an MA. I registered for a PhD some 6 years ago but dropped out because I could no longer fund it (although I felt that a lot of academics were too far up their own backsides). But I would be stupid if I didn’t recognise the glass ceiling that operates for “minorities” (including women – yeah I know…”minority”). Look at the CEOs for most global blue chip companies – they are largely white, middle class and male.

I want a level playing field too. But none exists. Affirmative action is aimed at trying to balance employment and get it too reflect society. Instead it often causes resentment. I am not arguing for it to be removed but recognise its limitations. Whilst the colour of my skin has hampered me in certain situations I still argue that class is far more important in determining life chances. But that’s another thread…
 

DeletedUser

The biggest problems I have with affirmative action are that I live in a society where such things are deemed neccessary, and the escalation of bad feeling, discrimination and intolerance that can result if it is handled poorly. If people were truly judged only on their merits, the concept of affirmative action would never have been invented. As a white middle class male I am happy to accept that I lead a very privileged existance and I find it quite offensive when people from similar backgrounds rant about the 'unfairness' of programs of affirmative action. Life isn't fair, but I'm sure most people would rather be born with all the advantages I've had than get some token piece of preferential treatment later in life.
 

DeletedUser

Hellstromm
how would you fell if you were given a test and you got A on it. then someone came in and said "this test is racist so im going to pass everyone that got a 60% or under and fail everyone who got an A "
 

DeletedUser

Gizmo, how would you feel if you were given a written test in Latin and you got a D on it, when the test material was supposed to be about field actions in a battlefield?

Point being, a test means nothing if it is designed to give an advantage to a select few. In the case of the test that was thrown out by the lower courts, county, state and finally the Federal Supreme Court, it was a test geared to highlight those with a higher degree of skill in writing, which is far and below on the list of skills necessary to perform the field duties of a firefighter, nor are they skills routinely practiced in the line of duty.

Additional information not available to you, and which likely influenced the courts decision is that the NHFD was a pure-white fire department, until 1967, serving a County with a 70.7% white predominance. It was determined, back then, other races were being disenfranchised, not based on qualifications, but based on race.

For the past 30+, the New Haven Fire Department has been resistant to walking from their past leanings and there still existed, as stated in the articles and in the case reports: racism, or as it was described, "cliques" within the Department. The Fire Department was under review, under scrutiny, when these tests were administered, and thus the reason why the County's administrative offices reviewed the tests and made a judgement call that these tests were biased in their evaluation of candidates, in as much as they were testing scholastic ability over field performance.

In other words, the tests were geared to determine the candidates' writing and comprehension skills, not their ability to perform the job for which they were initially hired to do, nor for the job they would be required to do if they were promoted. Firefighters are not desk clerks, they are field workers, blue collar, get in the dirt, burn your hands, kind of work.

Also, Gizmo, your analogy isn't what happened. They didn't throw away the high scores while keeping the low scores. They threw away the entire test. The entire test was deemed to be invalid.

Still, if were to drive with your argument, and I received an A on the test, but they threw it out, passing me by despite my high score on the test, I could claim racism, or I could claim age discrimination, or even I could claim discrimination based on disability. But, that is simply not what happened in this case, and thus I would have no case. After reviewing the test, and the test results, it was determined that the test was biased in presentation and specifically targetted those candidates with a higher degree of English comprehension and writing skills, which are not high value skills for being a firefighter.

Does this make sense now?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

I guess I'll add one more comment. The persons who took this test feel they "earned" a promotion based on the results of the test. The County argued, quite effectively, that a feeling of entitlement does not generate a promotion.

A promotion, quite simply, is not earned, and especially not on the basis of a single test score. Promotions are changes from one position to the next, an internal job interview, if you will. Nobody earns a job based on an interview, nor based on the completion of a test, regardless of the results of that test. Ultimately, it is within the purview of the employer to determine who they wish to hire for the next position.

In the fire department, as in the police department, ranks are provided as a means to differentiate job titles. But, they are still job titles, and while they work in many ways similar to military ranks, they are not military ranks, but civilian ranks. So, cut the cheese any way you want it, it's still cheese. The ranks are still job titles, and thus an opportunity for promotion is still a very biased, selective process that may very well include some racial favoritism.

The problem with the test is that it clearly demonstrated (and all the courts agreed) a biased approach, in that it relied heavily on testing of scholastic aptitude, where all the witness experts agreed was not an appropriate measure of promotional qualities for the field of firefighting. Since it was well known the minorities of New Haven were disenfranchised during their early scholastic studies (due in part to segregation and financial disparity), it would be only logical to assume a test geared to test a candidate's scholastic aptitude would result in a weaning out of minorities.

Point being, and as stated earlier, when you're out there on the field (fighting fires, saving lives, and directing firefighters to double-back on the blaze), being able to write an essay means crap-diddly.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Firefighters are clearly racist.

3471211868_39d859e4db.jpg

3470397495_6bfe5f5f1e.jpg


How much more evidence do you need?
 

DeletedUser

Try looking at it from the other side for a change. Imagine yourself as someone of Scandanavian ancestory who is living in a world that is almost entirely ruled by those of (what is now considered to be) African-American descent. For 100s of years, your ancestors were slaves or migratory workers living on next to nothing.

You look for a place to live, but they don't want "white" people in their neighborhood driving down property values, you're constantly refused jobs which are given to less qualified "black" people, you get the worst seats in restaurants, get slower service everywhere, etc. All good jobs are given to people with darker hair, complexion and eyes. People use makeup to darken their skin, perms and dye to make their hair more like the "ruling class" and wear brown contact lenses to cover their blue eyes.

One day, you read about the affirmative action laws that were enacted to help white people get more fair treatment, and that there is a quota for businesses - say 30% of the employess must be of white descent. You take a test for a job that you're extremely well qualified for, but it goes to someone less qualified who physically fits the desired image. You take the company to court for not following the affirmative action laws, and present as proof that there isn't a single white person employed there, in spite of there being 3000 employees. The court rules against you because they find that over 50% of the people working there are at least 10% white.

I do think that we are getting better about these things in most places, but I also believe that in many areas the unemployment rate for members of minority groups would be a lot higher in many areas if it weren't for these laws.
 

DeletedUser

Artemis Gordon said:
I do think that we are getting better about these things in most places, but I also believe that in many areas the unemployment rate for members of minority groups would be a lot higher in many areas if it weren't for these laws.
Click to expand...

and we probubly would not have all these so called "white trash" people around now would we
 
nashy19

nashy19

Nashy (as himself)
gizmo501 said:
and we probubly would not have all these so called "white trash" people around now would we
Click to expand...

"we probably wonldn't have as many white people in trailer parks, if it weren't for laws that keep unemployment low"
That's what sense I made out of that and I've read the whole thread :)bandit:)

Probubly :unsure:
 

DeletedUser

nashy19 said:
"we probably wonldn't have as many white people in trailer parks, if it weren't for laws that keep unemployment low"
That's what sense I made out of that and I've read the whole thread :)bandit:)

Probubly :unsure:
Click to expand...

or gang violence, or violent Rap music

since the majority of gangs are minorities
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top