14 city firefighters finally promoted

[Polk]

Both articles also make the point that the court's ruling leaves cities in limbo.

That's the basic problem in this case. If the City hadn't cancelled the test results, it was potentially vulnerable to a "disparate impact" suit under Title VII from the black firefighters. When it did cancel the test results, the City was sued by the white and hispanic firefighters for "disparate treatment" in violation of the same law. In light of that problem, the precise legal standard governing the City's action makes a big difference. Under the decision of the majority, the City must have "strong evidence" that the test is not job related before it can cancel the results. The dissent would let the City cancel the results so long as it acts in "good faith." From the City's perspective the decision of the majority in the Ricci case puts them on the horns of a dilemma. If a test is administered that has a racially disproportionate impact the City has the burden of proving to black candidates that the test was fair – but it can't cancel the test unless it has strong evidence that it was not fair. After this case I wouldn't want to sit on a City Council trying to guess how a court two or three years in the future was likely to evaluate the fairness of the test. Of course, if I were a candidate for promotion I wouldn't want to have to study for a test whose results could be easily thrown out.

Ricci v. DeStefano – the New Haven Firefighter case – Which Is Fairer, Multiple Choice or Oral Examinations?

 

[saveliberty]

Oy. So, when I make a mistake, I admit it. The issue wasn't the oral exam, it was written one (though biases do exist in the issuing of oral exams, which is why they're generally frowned upon). I was working off of memory instead of refreshing myself about the exams before commenting. The African-American applicants scored as well on the oral exam, but not as well on the written test. This wasn't due to any lack of studying by the African-American candidates though. It was because the white candidates had more access to study materials.

Justice Ginsburg wrote a dissenting opinion (beginning at page 54) for four members of the Court – herself and Justices Stevens, Souter, and Breyer. She says that the majority opinion “leaves out important parts of the story,” including the history of racial discrimination in the firefighting profession (in New Haven in the early 1970s racial minorities comprised 30 % of the city’s population but only 3 % of the firefighters) – that the white candidates in this case had greater access to study materials because they had relatives in the department – that other cities use different tests that have less racially disproportionate impact – and that multiple choice tests may not be the best way to evaluate leadership capability in the field. In particular, the dissenters thought that the City of New Haven acted in good faith when it threw out the test results. The dissenters found that there was substantial evidence that the City was worried that it would not be able to defend the validity of the test if the black firefighters brought a suit under Title VII for "disparate impact."

Ricci v. DeStefano – the New Haven Firefighter case – Which Is Fairer, Multiple Choice or Oral Examinations?

In further oddity, it turns out the highest scorer overall was in fact one of the African-American candidates.

The reason Briscoe is suing now, rather than suing earlier: He had to wait to find out the results of the test. Briscoe states that he topped the field on the oral section, but not on the written.

...

Although Briscoe had the highest score in the department on the oral section of the exam, he ended up 24th overall: not high enough for a promotion.

He would have been promoted “if it had been scored in a sensible way,” said Rosen. A weighting of even 60 percent oral to 40 percent written would have given Briscoe a top score, making him eligible for promotion.

If the exam had been weighted like other city’s exams, more African-Americans would have been among the top scorers, according to the complaint. It states, “If the oral exam were weighted 70 percent — the norm for public safety agencies across America — the plaintiff would be ranked fourth, and three African-Americans instead of none would be in the top 12.”

New Haven Independent | After <em>Ricci</em> Ruling, Black Firefighter Sues City

Thanks for admiting the error. I remembered it being more weighted on the written, but you were pretty cranked up so I decided to let it slide. The test is not a surprise. Everyone had an opportunity to know how much each part of the test was counted. The test was not on algebra or brain surgery techniques, it was on procedures and situations fire fighters have to know. I have taken state exams in construction, real estate and securities. Passed everyone the first time. You study the appropriate material and quiz yourself repeatedly. You attend classes that help you learn the way they ask questions and what weight they have put on different subjects.

The construction test in particular was interesting. I had no trouble with the bidding and legal sections. The construction terms were harder for me, but I simply memorized and drilled. There were people there who could build a house much better than me, but couldn't get the math. Too bad, they stay the laborers and I get to run the company.

 

[xotoxi]

Damn city government, having the nerve to obey the law. What the hell were they thinking.

The Supreme Court is the highest law of the land. The city should follow the damn law. I agree!

I thought the Constitution was the highest (supreme) law of the land? And that the Supreme Court was the highest court in the land?


When did this change happen?

Wrong. The Bible is the highest law of the land.

 

[xotoxi]

Oy. So, when I make a mistake, I admit it. The issue wasn't the oral exam, it was written one (though biases do exist in the issuing of oral exams, which is why they're generally frowned upon). I was working off of memory instead of refreshing myself about the exams before commenting....

Very classy to admit an error.

Many others would have either run away or dropped a few F-bombs.

 

[Godboy]

The Supreme Court is the highest law of the land. The city should follow the damn law. I agree!

I thought the Constitution was the highest (supreme) law of the land? And that the Supreme Court was the highest court in the land?


When did this change happen?

Wrong. The Bible is the highest law of the land.

No, that isnt even possible. Alot of us think its a joke, therefore is is totally unimportant and useless.

 

[Xenophon]

6 years...further proof how rediculous our society can be.

BTW, the city did not follow the law, which is why these guys are now promoted, no matter how some people try to spin it.

 

[Polk]

6 years...further proof how rediculous our society can be.

BTW, the city did not follow the law, which is why these guys are now promoted, no matter how some people try to spin it.

Read the relevant court cases before that decision. You'll see that the city was following what had previously been deemed the proper legal practice.

 

[saveliberty]

6 years...further proof how rediculous our society can be.

BTW, the city did not follow the law, which is why these guys are now promoted, no matter how some people try to spin it.

Read the relevant court cases before that decision. You'll see that the city was following what had previously been deemed the proper legal practice.

Playing both sides Polk. You spent a great deal of time on this thread talking about how the city made errors in testing. At one point you said they messed up on the oral part, then the written was the problem. The ONLY thing you were consistent about was the city was at fault for not following previous practice and legal groundwork.

The city threw out the results because they would rather discriminate against whites than blacks. The Supreme Court called them on it.

 

[Polk]

6 years...further proof how rediculous our society can be.

BTW, the city did not follow the law, which is why these guys are now promoted, no matter how some people try to spin it.

Read the relevant court cases before that decision. You'll see that the city was following what had previously been deemed the proper legal practice.

Playing both sides Polk. You spent a great deal of time on this thread talking about how the city made errors in testing. At one point you said they messed up on the oral part, then the written was the problem. The ONLY thing you were consistent about was the city was at fault for not following previous practice and legal groundwork.

The city threw out the results because they would rather discriminate against whites than blacks. The Supreme Court called them on it.

I admitted to making a mistake about the relative weights given to the test portions. I've been consistent on the fundamentals: the weights used on the test were discriminatory and the city abided by existing law when they made the decision to throw out the results. The Supreme Court's conservative majority once again made an activist decision when the result of their activism could favor a group they liked.

 

[Yurt]

Read the relevant court cases before that decision. You'll see that the city was following what had previously been deemed the proper legal practice.

Playing both sides Polk. You spent a great deal of time on this thread talking about how the city made errors in testing. At one point you said they messed up on the oral part, then the written was the problem. The ONLY thing you were consistent about was the city was at fault for not following previous practice and legal groundwork.

The city threw out the results because they would rather discriminate against whites than blacks. The Supreme Court called them on it.

I admitted to making a mistake about the relative weights given to the test portions. I've been consistent on the fundamentals: the weights used on the test were discriminatory and the city abided by existing law when they made the decision to throw out the results. The Supreme Court's conservative majority once again made an activist decision when the result of their activism could favor a group they liked.

you're a hypocrite.....the courts "following" decisions prior to the scotus ruling are law and are not activist....but the scotus making a final rulilng is activist....

the word for people like you.....hack

 

[Polk]

Playing both sides Polk. You spent a great deal of time on this thread talking about how the city made errors in testing. At one point you said they messed up on the oral part, then the written was the problem. The ONLY thing you were consistent about was the city was at fault for not following previous practice and legal groundwork.

The city threw out the results because they would rather discriminate against whites than blacks. The Supreme Court called them on it.

I admitted to making a mistake about the relative weights given to the test portions. I've been consistent on the fundamentals: the weights used on the test were discriminatory and the city abided by existing law when they made the decision to throw out the results. The Supreme Court's conservative majority once again made an activist decision when the result of their activism could favor a group they liked.

you're a hypocrite.....the courts "following" decisions prior to the scotus ruling are law and are not activist....but the scotus making a final rulilng is activist....

the word for people like you.....hack

Of course the SCOTUS ruling is activist. Had the races of the persons involved been reverse, the case never would have been granted cert.

 

[saveliberty]

Read the relevant court cases before that decision. You'll see that the city was following what had previously been deemed the proper legal practice.

Playing both sides Polk. You spent a great deal of time on this thread talking about how the city made errors in testing. At one point you said they messed up on the oral part, then the written was the problem. The ONLY thing you were consistent about was the city was at fault for not following previous practice and legal groundwork.

The city threw out the results because they would rather discriminate against whites than blacks. The Supreme Court called them on it.

I admitted to making a mistake about the relative weights given to the test portions. I've been consistent on the fundamentals: the weights used on the test were discriminatory and the city abided by existing law when they made the decision to throw out the results. The Supreme Court's conservative majority once again made an activist decision when the result of their activism could favor a group they liked.

No the court was not activist. They simply said the city violated the rights of the group who passed the test. The city thought the test was fair up til the results were determined. When they didn't get enough minority qualifieds, they changed their minds. There was some unstated quotas by the city.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Your ignorance knows no bounds. They didn't "pass" because they "worked their asses off". They received higher scores because of the city's choice to place a higher weight on oral portion of the exam that other cities did.

what? black people can't talk?

Swing and miss. Written exams are objective. Oral exams are not. And there is a ton of evidence showing that graders are much more generous in the scoring of oral exams of people of the same race. So when you have a test being administered by white people, they're going to give white people higher scores.

You're so full of shit...you just struck out you racist bastard!!!

NOW PROVE WHAT YOU SAY IS TRUE WITH FACTS INSTEAD OF YOUR BULLSHIT DAILYKOS TALKING POINTS!

 

[Polk]

Playing both sides Polk. You spent a great deal of time on this thread talking about how the city made errors in testing. At one point you said they messed up on the oral part, then the written was the problem. The ONLY thing you were consistent about was the city was at fault for not following previous practice and legal groundwork.

The city threw out the results because they would rather discriminate against whites than blacks. The Supreme Court called them on it.

I admitted to making a mistake about the relative weights given to the test portions. I've been consistent on the fundamentals: the weights used on the test were discriminatory and the city abided by existing law when they made the decision to throw out the results. The Supreme Court's conservative majority once again made an activist decision when the result of their activism could favor a group they liked.

No the court was not activist. They simply said the city violated the rights of the group who passed the test. The city thought the test was fair up til the results were determined. When they didn't get enough minority qualifieds, they changed their minds. There was some unstated quotas by the city.

There is no right to benefit from the results of a biased test.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Read the relevant court cases before that decision. You'll see that the city was following what had previously been deemed the proper legal practice.

Playing both sides Polk. You spent a great deal of time on this thread talking about how the city made errors in testing. At one point you said they messed up on the oral part, then the written was the problem. The ONLY thing you were consistent about was the city was at fault for not following previous practice and legal groundwork.

The city threw out the results because they would rather discriminate against whites than blacks. The Supreme Court called them on it.

I admitted to making a mistake about the relative weights given to the test portions. I've been consistent on the fundamentals: the weights used on the test were discriminatory and the city abided by existing law when they made the decision to throw out the results. The Supreme Court's conservative majority once again made an activist decision when the result of their activism could favor a group they liked.

How about this....you're a Huffpost parrot and have no idea what you're talking about.

The simple fact of the matter is this...they took the test, they were denied promotions because they were NOT minority candidates, they sued, they WON, they were promoted.

A classic case of reverse discrimination was corrected by our legal system.

 

[Polk]

what? black people can't talk?

Swing and miss. Written exams are objective. Oral exams are not. And there is a ton of evidence showing that graders are much more generous in the scoring of oral exams of people of the same race. So when you have a test being administered by white people, they're going to give white people higher scores.

You're so full of shit...you just struck out you racist bastard!!!

NOW PROVE WHAT YOU SAY IS TRUE WITH FACTS INSTEAD OF YOUR BULLSHIT DAILYKOS TALKING POINTS!

Scream racist all you want, but you're pretty damn naive if you think people don't look out for people like them (the same goes for minorities too).

 

[Polk]

Playing both sides Polk. You spent a great deal of time on this thread talking about how the city made errors in testing. At one point you said they messed up on the oral part, then the written was the problem. The ONLY thing you were consistent about was the city was at fault for not following previous practice and legal groundwork.

The city threw out the results because they would rather discriminate against whites than blacks. The Supreme Court called them on it.

I admitted to making a mistake about the relative weights given to the test portions. I've been consistent on the fundamentals: the weights used on the test were discriminatory and the city abided by existing law when they made the decision to throw out the results. The Supreme Court's conservative majority once again made an activist decision when the result of their activism could favor a group they liked.

How about this....you're a Huffpost parrot and have no idea what you're talking about.

The simple fact of the matter is this...they took the test, they were denied promotions because they were NOT minority candidates, they sued, they WON, they were promoted.

A classic case of reverse discrimination was corrected by our legal system.

No, they were denied promotions because the city saw that the relative weights they gave to the portions created disparate impact.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Swing and miss. Written exams are objective. Oral exams are not. And there is a ton of evidence showing that graders are much more generous in the scoring of oral exams of people of the same race. So when you have a test being administered by white people, they're going to give white people higher scores.

You're so full of shit...you just struck out you racist bastard!!!

NOW PROVE WHAT YOU SAY IS TRUE WITH FACTS INSTEAD OF YOUR BULLSHIT DAILYKOS TALKING POINTS!

Scream racist all you want, but you're pretty damn naive if you think people don't look out for people like them (the same goes for minorities too).

So...that's your fact based defennse?

Lay off the sauce polk...it's just not compatable wth your physiology.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

I admitted to making a mistake about the relative weights given to the test portions. I've been consistent on the fundamentals: the weights used on the test were discriminatory and the city abided by existing law when they made the decision to throw out the results. The Supreme Court's conservative majority once again made an activist decision when the result of their activism could favor a group they liked.

How about this....you're a Huffpost parrot and have no idea what you're talking about.

The simple fact of the matter is this...they took the test, they were denied promotions because they were NOT minority candidates, they sued, they WON, they were promoted.

A classic case of reverse discrimination was corrected by our legal system.

No, they were denied promotions because the city saw that the relative weights they gave to the portions created disparate impact.

Uhhhhhh....parrot your DU/Huff talking points all you want...but keep this in mind...THEY WON THEIR CASE...THEY WERE PROMOTED. Have a lovely day..

 

[Polk]

How about this....you're a Huffpost parrot and have no idea what you're talking about.

The simple fact of the matter is this...they took the test, they were denied promotions because they were NOT minority candidates, they sued, they WON, they were promoted.

A classic case of reverse discrimination was corrected by our legal system.

No, they were denied promotions because the city saw that the relative weights they gave to the portions created disparate impact.

Uhhhhhh....parrot your DU/Huff talking points all you want...but keep this in mind...THEY WON THEIR CASE...THEY WERE PROMOTED. Have a lovely day..

They won their case. So what? The majority of the court also ruled in favor of John Sanford in Dred Scott v. Sandford and in favor of Ferguson in Plessy v. Ferguson. Just because the majority says something is correct and proper doesn't make it so.