Race and age are the focus of a discrimination case in Mobile, Alabama. A white firefighter claims the department promoted a lower-scoring black man and a lower-scoring younger white man over him.
William C. Hunter scored second highest on a promotions test, but a black firefighter in sixth place and a white firefighter in third place were promoted. For his high score, Hunter received nothing. An excerpt:
“Andy Rutens, an attorney for the city, could not be reached for comment but issued the following statement: ‘The city denies that age or race played a factor in the promotion process. The city promoted three highly qualified individuals.
“According to the suit, Hunter began working for the Fire-Rescue Department 38 years ago and steadily rose through the ranks until he became fire services district chief in 1995.”
Blacks as a group score lower on standardized tests than whites, on average, and employers devise ways to get around strict test score assessments. In Mobile, the department chose from among the top 10 scorers to fill three vacant positions, rather than select the three highest scorers. Hunter also accused the department of watering down standards to hire more blacks, and switching from objective to subjective exams.
Do fire and police departments across the country use similar tactics? Most likely. If departments hired and promoted on an objective highest-scores standard, minorities would sue, claiming disparate impact. When departments hire and promote based on a subjective standard, higher scorers who’re shut out of jobs and promotions are justifiably resentful.
{ 2 comments }
My uncle worked for the State of California and he told me that jobs were filled by having the applicants with the 3 highest test scores interview and then one of them will be selected to fill the opening. The highest scorer will not necessarily be the one that is hired. The same thing happens with most government hiring with regards to veterans preferences. A veteran without a service connected disability will get 5 points added to their score. A disabled veteran will get an additional 10 points added. Why is this not discrimination?
In the Hunter situation, the department promoted #1, #3, and #6 over Hunter. Why skip #2? Why not hire 1 and 2, then 6? Perhaps Hunter had other issues going on.
The veterans situation is different. The country fought a war, in essence, to stop the government from assessing people based on skin color or racial group membership. With veterans preferences, ALL races benefit.
Comments on this entry are closed.