According to THIS article it looks as though a judge ruled that the Chicago firefighters exam was biased against blacks because it set a bar for applicants to score a 89 or above and be listed as “well-qualified”. If you scored between a 65 and 88 you were listed as “qualified”. They were chosing firefighters who only scored in the “well-qualified” area.
Can someone explain to me how this is biased against blacks??
Is the judge trying to say that because blacks as a whole scored lower than others that they still should be accepted over those that scored higher?
I just don’t understand the reasoning behind this.
Unfortunately, the article doesn’t give enough information to determine what’s going on and I haven’t read about this scandal in the other Chicago papers (although it may come up in the next few days) nor other Chicago-area news locations.
Presumably, there’s some sort of educational component that blacks don’t have access to. I have absolutely no idea what that might be though.
This reminds me of a time not too far gone when FD tests were told to have separate standards for women. The reasoning was that the things that tested upperbody strength were biased towards men who typically had greater upperbody strength than women.
The rebuttal was that the standards were in place because the job requires significant strength and someone who didn’t meet that standard would be risking lives.
IIRC, the way it was spun was that the tests were to humiliate female candidates and not admit them into a boys club. I recall that separate standards were introduced although to this day, I can’t think of ever seeing a female firefighter.
It seems to me the crux of the argument was that the test did not accurately judge the skills needed to be a fireman, and that the cutoff point was arbitrarily drawn. If the powers that be picked the number 88 for improper reasons, then the firemen may have been unfairly treated.
from the article:
“In a ruling issued Tuesday, U.S. District Judge Joan Gottschall said the test ‘could not distinguish between those who were qualified for the position of (firefighter) and those who were not,’ and she called the cutoff point meaningless”
I think they might have a point, but it’s hard to tell without having more information, and seeing the test.
Another point that wasn’t discussed in the article is that many firehouses are incredible segregated. They are like fraternities; it’s more about finding a person you can get along with then one would think. I have a few friends that are firemen who have personally experienced racism at their firehouses. From what they tell me, I don’t have a hard time believing that many of the people in power would take measures to avoid having blacks in their firehouse. I don’t know if that is true in this case, but apparently the judge does.
The article seems to suggest that the judge’s reasoning was along the lines of:
in 1995 the Fire Department knocked back applicants who couldn’t score well enough to make it into the “well-qualified” category;
but by 2002, due to a lack of “well-qualified” applicants, the Fire Department was happy to take applicants who had only scored at the “qualified” level;
so therefore the test itself must be invalid as a means of assessing applicants’ capability
If you accept this logic (and I’m not sure that I do) I would think that the conclusion is that all those applicants who were refused admission in 1995 because they could only manage a “qualified” score can now claim damages - not just the black ones.