14 city firefighters finally promoted

[Polk]

Also, I love how the right-wing hero in this case is a serial plaintiff who advanced his career by screaming discrimination any time he hit a roadblock.

 

[saveliberty]

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.

Actually, it does make it so. This is what you call progress. We progressed from needing affirmative action (an activist role) to making sure individuals are not discriminated against. Color blind. It is progress embrace it. At least that is what I heard when Obama was elected. Did somebody tell me a fib?

 

[Polk]

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.

Actually, it does make it so. This is what you call progress. We progressed from needing affirmative action (an activist role) to making sure individuals are not discriminated against. Color blind. It is progress embrace it. At least that is what I heard when Obama was elected. Did somebody tell me a fib?

It doesn't make it so. The court rules on matters of law, not morality.

And you're ignoring the fact that people were discriminated against in this case. The fact of the matter is that the scale used by the city of New Haven produced results biased against African-Americans. If you were to look at the scale used in other Connecticut cities, you would see that under the most common rubric, at least some African-Americans would have been in the top scorers.

 

[PatekPhilippe]

Also, I love how the right-wing hero in this case is a serial plaintiff who advanced his career by screaming discrimination any time he hit a roadblock.

Oh...now he's a right wing hero...I suppose he stole the sign over the gate to Auschwitz too right? Got any more baseless suppositions to share with us polk?

 

[IanC]

hahaha

this thread is perfectly illustrates the black position. Polk mistakenly attacks the oral portion of the test and calls it racially biased, and demands that the written portion be more heavily weighted. upon learning it was the oral portion that black had more success with, he reverses direction and calls the black who did well on the verbal exam the best candidate, and demands the verbal be given more weight.

with blacks, fairness can't be determined until the results are in and adjustments are made to help black candidates score higher. hell, even the same test taken in different years might need alternate 'adjustments', depending on the results. black math, black fairness.

perhaps we should solve it the old fashioned way, like kids with the last chunk of cake (one cuts, the other chooses); let the black firefighters brotherhood make up the test and then hold everyone to it for the next ten years.

 

[Polk]

I made a statement based off of memory. But, of course, you've never misspoke in your entire life. Also, newsflash jackass: I'm white.

 

[IanC]

I made a statement based off of memory. But, of course, you've never misspoke in your entire life. Also, newsflash jackass: I'm white.

it doesn't matter whether you're black or white. you are a proponent of the black position of 'fairness can only be judged after the results are in'.

the study material was strictly defined, as was the method of testing. it was only deemed unfair when no blacks were chosen.

 

[IanC]

actually Polk, why don't you explain how you switched from calling the oral test biased and the written portion fair to the reverse position of the written part biased and the oral portion fair? was it on the merits of each, or was it because of the results obtained? in the next test which should be more important? or is it too soon to tell?

 

[Polk]

I made a statement based off of memory. But, of course, you've never misspoke in your entire life. Also, newsflash jackass: I'm white.

it doesn't matter whether you're black or white. you are a proponent of the black position of 'fairness can only be judged after the results are in'.

the study material was strictly defined, as was the method of testing. it was only deemed unfair when no blacks were chosen.

You're mischaracterizing my position. It's not that "fairness can only be judged after the results are in". The issue was present all along. And no, the study material isn't "strictly defined". Many of the questions on the written test are completely irrelevant to New Haven. One question, for example, asked fire equipment should be parked "uptown, downtown, or underground", a question that doesn't apply to New Haven as it has no "uptown" or "downtown". That the weight of each portion of the testing was defined in advance is irrelevant. The weighting used caused a disparate impact. According the Civil Rights Act of 1965, even if a policy is race-neutral on the surface, if it causes a disparate impact, it's the responsibility of a locality to show the policy is necessary. In that case, it clearly wasn't, as other localities in the state place a greater weight on the oral exam.

 

[Polk]

actually Polk, why don't you explain how you switched from calling the oral test biased and the written portion fair to the reverse position of the written part biased and the oral portion fair? was it on the merits of each, or was it because of the results obtained? in the next test which should be more important? or is it too soon to tell?

I didn't switch positions. I made an error in my original statement as to the relative weighting of the portions.

 

[IanC]

The weighting used caused a disparate impact. According the Civil Rights Act of 1965, even if a policy is race-neutral on the surface, if it causes a disparate impact, it's the responsibility of a locality to show the policy is necessary. In that case, it clearly wasn't, as other localities in the state place a greater weight on the oral exam.

you already said the verbal portion was open to bias, unlike the written portion. if the results were opposite, blacks scoring higher on the written rather than the verbal, would you be arguing for increased weighting for the written? I think you would be.

as far as disparate impact; there has always been a difference in passing rates, that is why the military would reject more than half of the black population. why are they exempt but not other areas?

 

[Polk]

The weighting used caused a disparate impact. According the Civil Rights Act of 1965, even if a policy is race-neutral on the surface, if it causes a disparate impact, it's the responsibility of a locality to show the policy is necessary. In that case, it clearly wasn't, as other localities in the state place a greater weight on the oral exam.

you already said the verbal portion was open to bias, unlike the written portion. if the results were opposite, blacks scoring higher on the written rather than the verbal, would you be arguing for increased weighting for the written? I think you would be.

as far as disparate impact; there has always been a difference in passing rates, that is why the military would reject more than half of the black population. why are they exempt but not other areas?

Verbal tests are open to bias, but that's not the topic at hand. I notice you keep trying to deflect. That's rather telling.

 

[IanC]

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.

was that not your previous statement? you assumed that white scorers would be biased in scoring whites higher during the oral exam. what is your present position, now that you know that blacks do better on the oral portion? and do you think that having one white, one hispanic and one black as scorers on the oral test has anything to do with minorities performing better?

 

[IanC]

The weighting used caused a disparate impact. According the Civil Rights Act of 1965, even if a policy is race-neutral on the surface, if it causes a disparate impact, it's the responsibility of a locality to show the policy is necessary. In that case, it clearly wasn't, as other localities in the state place a greater weight on the oral exam.

you already said the verbal portion was open to bias, unlike the written portion. if the results were opposite, blacks scoring higher on the written rather than the verbal, would you be arguing for increased weighting for the written? I think you would be.

as far as disparate impact; there has always been a difference in passing rates, that is why the military would reject more than half of the black population. why are they exempt but not other areas?

Verbal tests are open to bias, but that's not the topic at hand. I notice you keep trying to deflect. That's rather telling.

trying to deflect? no way buddy. I'm trying to show that you were happy to call whites biased before but I bet you won't be calling the minorities biased, now that you have the actual facts of the case.

 

[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.

was that not your previous statement? you assumed that white scorers would be biased in scoring whites higher during the oral exam. what is your present position, now that you know that blacks do better on the oral portion? and do you think that having one white, one hispanic and one black as scorers on the oral test has anything to do with minorities performing better?

My position is still the same. There are biases in the scoring of oral exams, but those biases disappear when the test is scored by a diverse group of graders. It helps keep all groups honest. The problem with the written exam is still the same: it tested knowledge completely irrelevant to New Haven.

 

[Polk]

you already said the verbal portion was open to bias, unlike the written portion. if the results were opposite, blacks scoring higher on the written rather than the verbal, would you be arguing for increased weighting for the written? I think you would be.

as far as disparate impact; there has always been a difference in passing rates, that is why the military would reject more than half of the black population. why are they exempt but not other areas?

Verbal tests are open to bias, but that's not the topic at hand. I notice you keep trying to deflect. That's rather telling.

trying to deflect? no way buddy. I'm trying to show that you were happy to call whites biased before but I bet you won't be calling the minorities biased, now that you have the actual facts of the case.

It would help if you read the thread.

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]

So what compelling public purpose was there to place a higher weight on the written test than is done in any other town in Connecticut?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

I made a statement based off of memory. But, of course, you've never misspoke in your entire life. Also, newsflash jackass: I'm white.

it doesn't matter whether you're black or white. you are a proponent of the black position of 'fairness can only be judged after the results are in'.

the study material was strictly defined, as was the method of testing. it was only deemed unfair when no blacks were chosen.

You're mischaracterizing my position. It's not that "fairness can only be judged after the results are in". The issue was present all along. And no, the study material isn't "strictly defined". Many of the questions on the written test are completely irrelevant to New Haven. One question, for example, asked fire equipment should be parked "uptown, downtown, or underground", a question that doesn't apply to New Haven as it has no "uptown" or "downtown". That the weight of each portion of the testing was defined in advance is irrelevant. The weighting used caused a disparate impact. According the Civil Rights Act of 1965, even if a policy is race-neutral on the surface, if it causes a disparate impact, it's the responsibility of a locality to show the policy is necessary. In that case, it clearly wasn't, as other localities in the state place a greater weight on the oral exam.

How is this question racially biased towards minority candidates?

 

[PatekPhilippe]

So what compelling public purpose was there to place a higher weight on the written test than is done in any other town in Connecticut?

That's THEIR PERROGATIVE!!! IT'S THEIR FIRE DEPARTMENT!!!

 

[Polk]

it doesn't matter whether you're black or white. you are a proponent of the black position of 'fairness can only be judged after the results are in'.

the study material was strictly defined, as was the method of testing. it was only deemed unfair when no blacks were chosen.

You're mischaracterizing my position. It's not that "fairness can only be judged after the results are in". The issue was present all along. And no, the study material isn't "strictly defined". Many of the questions on the written test are completely irrelevant to New Haven. One question, for example, asked fire equipment should be parked "uptown, downtown, or underground", a question that doesn't apply to New Haven as it has no "uptown" or "downtown". That the weight of each portion of the testing was defined in advance is irrelevant. The weighting used caused a disparate impact. According the Civil Rights Act of 1965, even if a policy is race-neutral on the surface, if it causes a disparate impact, it's the responsibility of a locality to show the policy is necessary. In that case, it clearly wasn't, as other localities in the state place a greater weight on the oral exam.

How is this question racially biased towards minority candidates?

Because it's only something that can be learned by knowing previous test-takers, which is far more common for white candidates.