Jump to content
Danno

LAW Suite: Physical tests 4 cops discriminate against ........

 Share

8 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: K-1 Visa Country: Russia
Timeline

DOJ lawsuit: Physical test for police officers discriminates against women

The Corpus Christi, Tex. Police Department has found itself on the business end of a civil rights lawsuit after the Justice Department concluded that a physical ability test used when considering job applications discriminates against women.

As a condition for employment, new applicants must pass a physical ability test (PAT) involving: pullups, a 300-meter run, a 1.5 mile run, and sit-ups. Only 19 percent of female applicants passed this test between 2005 and 2009, compared to 63 percent of men, the DOJ complaint records.

The Justice Department says that the test discriminates against women because “use of the PAT in the screening and selection of applicants for entry-level police officer jobs is not job-related, for the entry-level police officer position,” according to the complaint.

“The Justice Department is looking forward to working with the city to resolve this matter in a way that eliminates the use of the unlawful physical ability test and gives women who were screened out of the process an opportunity to become Corpus Christi police officers,” Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, said in a statement on the lawsuit.

“If women had passed the PAT at the same rate as men, approximately 62 additional women would have been available for further consideration for the position of entry-level police officer,” the Justice Department complaint also says.

In 2011, the city police modified the benchmarks for the PAT. Thirty-three percent of women passed the test under the new standards, along with 82 percent of men. DOJ says that these results also indicate discrimination.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/doj-lawsuit-physical-test-for-police-officers-discriminates-against-women/article/2501267

type2homophobia_zpsf8eddc83.jpg




"Those people who will not be governed by God


will be ruled by tyrants."



William Penn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: England
Timeline

Would it also discriminate racially - after all, some races are typically large and strong whereas other races are typically the opposite

Will the day ever come that we are not allowed to discriminate on whether a candidate is intelligent or the opposite ?

I didn't make any reference to W so don't say I did

moresheep400100.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DOJ lawsuit: Physical test for police officers discriminates against women

The Corpus Christi, Tex. Police Department has found itself on the business end of a civil rights lawsuit after the Justice Department concluded that a physical ability test used when considering job applications discriminates against women.

As a condition for employment, new applicants must pass a physical ability test (PAT) involving: pullups, a 300-meter run, a 1.5 mile run, and sit-ups. Only 19 percent of female applicants passed this test between 2005 and 2009, compared to 63 percent of men, the DOJ complaint records.

The Justice Department says that the test discriminates against women because “use of the PAT in the screening and selection of applicants for entry-level police officer jobs is not job-related, for the entry-level police officer position,” according to the complaint.

“The Justice Department is looking forward to working with the city to resolve this matter in a way that eliminates the use of the unlawful physical ability test and gives women who were screened out of the process an opportunity to become Corpus Christi police officers,” Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, said in a statement on the lawsuit.

“If women had passed the PAT at the same rate as men, approximately 62 additional women would have been available for further consideration for the position of entry-level police officer,” the Justice Department complaint also says.

In 2011, the city police modified the benchmarks for the PAT. Thirty-three percent of women passed the test under the new standards, along with 82 percent of men. DOJ says that these results also indicate discrimination.

http://washingtonexaminer.com/doj-lawsuit-physical-test-for-police-officers-discriminates-against-women/article/2501267

I remember back in the mid 70's when the Tacoma Fire Department changed all it's rules to fix it so women and minorities could scarf up jobs there even if it meant they weren't qualified. My uncle was a lieutenant in that dept. back then and he was livid. He pointed out that if a chick couldn't pass the physical exam then how was she going to pull people out of a burning building. They were forfeiting peoples lives just to be politically correct. This country just keeps getting worse and worse.

sigbet.jpg

"I want to take this opportunity to mention how thankful I am for an Obama re-election. The choice was clear. We cannot live in a country that treats homosexuals and women as second class citizens. Homosexuals deserve all of the rights and benefits of marriage that heterosexuals receive. Women deserve to be treated with respect and their salaries should not depend on their gender, but their quality of work. I am also thankful that the great, progressive state of California once again voted for the correct President. America is moving forward, and the direction is a positive one."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: England
Timeline

I remember back in the mid 70's when the Tacoma Fire Department changed all it's rules to fix it so women and minorities could scarf up jobs there even if it meant they weren't qualified. My uncle was a lieutenant in that dept. back then and he was livid. He pointed out that if a chick couldn't pass the physical exam then how was she going to pull people out of a burning building. They were forfeiting peoples lives just to be politically correct. This country just keeps getting worse and worse.

Scarf up ? Do you mean they were Muslim women ?

moresheep400100.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DOJ lawsuit: Physical test for police officers discriminates against women

The Corpus Christi, Tex. Police Department has found itself on the business end of a civil rights lawsuit after the Justice Department concluded that a physical ability test used when considering job applications discriminates against women.

As a condition for employment, new applicants must pass a physical ability test (PAT) involving: pullups, a 300-meter run, a 1.5 mile run, and sit-ups. Only 19 percent of female applicants passed this test between 2005 and 2009, compared to 63 percent of men, the DOJ complaint records.

The Justice Department says that the test discriminates against women because "use of the PAT in the screening and selection of applicants for entry-level police officer jobs is not job-related, for the entry-level police officer position," according to the complaint.

"The Justice Department is looking forward to working with the city to resolve this matter in a way that eliminates the use of the unlawful physical ability test and gives women who were screened out of the process an opportunity to become Corpus Christi police officers," Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, said in a statement on the lawsuit.

"If women had passed the PAT at the same rate as men, approximately 62 additional women would have been available for further consideration for the position of entry-level police officer," the Justice Department complaint also says.

In 2011, the city police modified the benchmarks for the PAT. Thirty-three percent of women passed the test under the new standards, along with 82 percent of men. DOJ says that these results also indicate discrimination.

http://washingtonexa...article/2501267

I can't imagine why we should have standards for Police officers, it makes no sense. It just gets weirder every day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: England
Timeline

I can't imagine why we should have standards for Police officers, it makes no sense. It just gets weirder every day.

When I was a kid, I joined Leeds City Police and the minimum height requirement was 5 foot 10

I guess that would be seen as discriminating against Gurkhas nowadays

Homosexuals could be arrested and jailed

Now, half the bloody government is 'gay'

The US has a married gay congressman - actually they probably have a few - I mean married to same sex

Its a different world for sure

moresheep400100.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: K-1 Visa Country: Russia
Timeline

When I was a kid, I joined Leeds City Police and the minimum height requirement was 5 foot 10

I guess that would be seen as discriminating against Gurkhas nowadays

This is a nuther double standard, the military and many civil service jobs reject men at different heights than women.

Why should a man be rejected while a woman 4 inches shorter than him is not?

Where is Obama on this when it came to gays and transgendered peps We heard "they just want to serve their country"...... well?

type2homophobia_zpsf8eddc83.jpg




"Those people who will not be governed by God


will be ruled by tyrants."



William Penn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: England
Timeline

This is a nuther double standard, the military and many civil service jobs reject men at different heights than women.

Why should a man be rejected while a woman 4 inches shorter than him is not?

Where is Obama on this when it came to gays and transgendered peps We heard "they just want to serve their country"...... well?

Well I suppose I have sort of made a sub-conscious effort to even it up coz I don't like tall women and favored the shorties at g/f's

They don't eat as much either

moresheep400100.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...