In Ricci v. DeStefano, over a dozen white firefighters and one Hispanic scored high enough on a promotion exam to qualify for promotions. Because no blacks scored high enough to qualify, however, the city threw out everyone’s test results for fear of disparate impact lawsuits. The U.S. Supreme Court called foul and said the move was unconstitutional.
After the firefighters requested their promotions, a group of black firefighters tried to block them. Despite the Supreme Court’s decision, they contended, they still had the right to challenge the test’s validity. Eventually, the qualified firefighters were promoted.
In a separate suit, a black firefighter in New Haven named Michael Briscoe claimed the promotions exam had a disparate impact on blacks. Specifically, he said that giving more weight to the written part of the exam over the oral was a disadvantage to blacks. The written portion of the test was weighted 60 percent; the oral 40 percent. Briscoe scored higher on the oral than any other exam taker.
Last week, a federal judge dismissed Biscoe’s suit. The court hasn’t released the opinion yet.
Try to understand what Briscoe and others who sue for disparate impact are saying. Look beyond the superficial surface-level discrimination claim and see the real claim. When blacks who earn lower scores on civil service exams sue under disparate impact, they’re implying that blacks can’t or shouldn’t be expected to compete with whites on pencil-and-paper civil service tests. Not the LSAT or the MCAT, but civil service tests. They are broadcasting a belief that they’re inferior. They are telling the world it’s discriminatory to even expect them to read and write well.
In our backward, PC world, requiring every applicant for a firefighter’s job and candidate for promotion to take an objective hiring or promotion exam, regardless of race, is suspect. The government used to do the opposite and make subjective, race-based judgments about who to hire and promote. The civil service exam was designed to end this practice. Now, such exams are perceived as tools of discrimination. And people go to court and publicly make the claim!
Some blacks pay lip service to equal treatment, expressing the desire to be seen and judged as an individual instead of “black person,” but in practice, they seem to abhor it. How sad. It takes courage to be free.
{ 2 comments }
Many times when I read articles about affirmative action, all I can think about is MLK’s dream of equality for everyone. His dream has not been fully accomplished yet. It’s more than overdue for everyone to be treated equal. Affirmative action needs to be eliminated.
“When blacks who earn lower scores on civil service exams sue under disparate impact, they’re implying that blacks can’t or shouldn’t be expected to compete with whites on pencil-and-paper civil service tests. Not the LSAT or the MCAT, but civil service tests. They are broadcasting a belief that they’re inferior. They are telling the world it’s discriminatory to even expect them to read and write well.” (LaShawn Barber)
That’s 100% correct.
Disparate impact is not only fallacious but it’s one of the most pernicious doctrines ever used.
Disparate impact, in and of itself, proves nothing. It’s a mere “snapshot in time.”
In New York City, whites have comprised a huge majority of that Fire Dept because (1) fewer blacks (10%) apply for those jobs relative to their numbers in that city (24%) and (2) for a whole host of reasons, more college educated whites are competing against non-college educated blacks and other minorities…a social phenomenon subject to change at any time.
Moreover, “disparate impact” is the doctrine behind the “subprime mortgage meltdown” and the subsequent global credit crisis.
SEE: http://workingclassconservative.blogspot.com/2009/12/how-disparate-impact-and-affirmative.html
Ironically enough, the “Merit System,” with its reliance on objectively graded WRITTEN (interviews and “oral exams” are entirely SUBJECTIVE) and physical exams was put in place to deal with a very overt form of discrimination (in favor of the politically connected and well-off and against everyone else) – nepotism, cronyism and the “PATRONAGE system.”
Wittingly or not, the supporters of “disparate impact,” are supporting policies that would put all these jobs once again, under political control.
Comments on this entry are closed.