Affirmative Action Stupidity

[Dustdevil]

Not technically "EMS News", but close enough. It affects us.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,517074,00.html

Reverse Discrimination Case Could Transform Hiring Procedures Nationwide

Saturday, April 18, 2009

Associated Press

NEW HAVEN, Conn. — Inside a burning building, fire doesn't discriminate between Matthew Marcarelli and Gary Tinney. Inside the New Haven Fire Department, however, skin color has put them on opposite sides of a lawsuit that could transform hiring procedures nationwide.

This week, the Supreme Court will consider the reverse discrimination claim of Marcarelli and a group of white firefighters. They all passed a promotion exam, but the city threw out the test because no blacks would have been promoted, saying the exam had a "disparate impact" on minorities likely to violate the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

Besides affecting how race can be considered in filling government and perhaps even private jobs, the dispute also addresses broader questions about racial progress: Do minorities and women still need legal protection from discrimination, or do the monumental civil rights laws that created a more equal nation now cause more harm than good?

Also, beneath the specific details of the firefighters' lawsuit lies an uncomfortable truth: On most standardized tests, regardless of the subject, blacks score lower than whites.

Reconciling that reality with efforts to ensure "justice for all" remains a work in progress — one that will be molded by the Supreme Court.

New Haven's population is 44 percent white, 36 percent black and 24 percent Hispanic (who can be any race). At the time of the 2003 test, 53 percent of the city's firefighters, 63 percent of lieutenants and 86 percent of captains were white. Blacks were 30 percent of the firefighters, 22 percent of lieutenants and 4 percent of captains.

The promotion exams were closely focused on firefighting methods, knowledge and skills. The first part had 200 multiple-choice questions and counted for 60 percent of the final score. Candidates returned another day to take an oral exam in which they described responses to various scenarios, which counted for 40 percent.

Tinney, a black lieutenant who has been a firefighter for 14 years, was seeking a promotion to captain when he took the exam.

He says both the test and his fire department have hidden biases against minorities: The department is historically white, with the first blacks joining in 1957, and jobs, relationships, knowledge and choice assignments are passed on from friend to friend and generation to generation.

"I just call it 'the network,"' Tinney says.

The white firefighters' attorney, Karen Torre, said they would not be interviewed for this story. In a conversation on Fox News' "Hannity" program, Marcarelli said it was "gut wrenching" to learn that he was No. 1 on the test but would not get promoted.

"It's something that shakes what you believe in. Because you believe if you work hard, you're rewarded for that, and that's not necessarily the case," Marcarelli said.

Torre said whites have no special advantage in promotions because of laws requiring use of a race-blind, score-based system. She added that many blacks have relatives on the force, including high-ranking officers.

One hundred and eighteen people took the tests; 56 passed. Nineteen of the top scorers were eligible for promotion to 15 open lieutenant and captain positions. Based on the test results, the city said that no minorities would have been eligible for lieutenant, and two Hispanics would have been eligible for captain. (The lawsuit was filed by 20 white plaintiffs, including one man who is both white and Hispanic.)

The exams were designed by a professional testing firm that followed federal guidelines for mitigating disparate racial outcomes, the plaintiffs say.

But after the results came back, the city says it found evidence that the tests were potentially flawed. Sources of bias included that the written section measured memorization rather than actual skills needed for the jobs; giving too much weight to the written section; and lack of testing for leadership in emergency conditions, according to a brief filed by officers of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.

"I'm sure there are numerous reasons why (blacks didn't do as well), and not because we're not as intelligent," Tinney says. "There's a lot of underlying issues to that ... these folks are saying, 'We studied the hardest, we passed the test, we should be promoted.' But they're not talking about all the other things."

Torre argues that discarding a test because no minorities would have been promoted violates the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, which forbids discrimination because of race.

Call it a legal riddle only the Supreme Court could solve: The white firefighters say Title VII prohibits discrimination against them for being white; New Haven says Title VII prohibits it from using a test that has a disparate impact against blacks.

"All were afforded the same notice, the same study period, the same exam syllabi, etc.," said Torre, who would only answer questions by e-mail. "The rest was up to the individual."

There are long-standing divisions over the concept of hardworking, qualified whites being "victimized" by laws or practices designed to help minorities overcome America's history of racism. What's different today is that the landscape has shifted in many ways, big and small.

The biggest is the election of President Obama, and the support he received from millions of white voters.

"It is not white racism that plays the deciding role in the success of minorities any more," says Edward Blum, a visiting scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who believes that race should not be considered in employment decisions.

"That was the case in the '60s and '70s and maybe even part of the '80s," he says. "But it is no longer the case in the 21st century that because you are black you are being held back from achieving what your parents and your ambitions will allow you to achieve. I think that has been crystallized with the election of President Obama."

Obama's election has been a boon to the movement that developed years ago seeking to reshape civil rights laws designed to remedy discrimination.

Besides the firefighters' lawsuit, the Supreme Court will soon hear a case seeking to overturn a Voting Rights Act requirement that all or parts of 16 states with a history of discrimination must get approval from the Justice Department before changing election procedures. And in 2007, the court struck down voluntary integration plans in two public school districts.

Even though it may result in less opportunities for qualified minorities, "the use of race does greater harm to our social fabric by being there than by being eliminated," Blum says.

Another major shift has been in the balance of the Supreme Court. Conservatives gained a 5-4 majority during the Bush administration, although Justice Anthony Kennedy is seen as a potential swing vote.

In Chief Justice John Roberts' majority opinion in the 2007 school ruling, one line rang loudest: "the way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race."

That statement was seen as a harbinger of future rulings that would end the use of race in employment, voting and awarding government contracts. It also rebutted a famous statement by Justice Harry Blackmun in the landmark Bakke affirmative action case: "In order to treat some persons equally, we must treat them differently."

Mary Frances Berry, a history professor at the University of Pennsylvania and head of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights during the Clinton administration, said the firefighters' case has broad implications.

"This is about whether we are going to see a sea change in how the judiciary looks at the need for these (protections), and how the popular culture and electoral politics influence their perceptions," Berry said.

The Obama administration has said such laws are needed and it is committed to enforcing them. The Justice Department's brief in the firefighters case supports New Haven's position that the city acted properly in throwing out the tests.

But in what many call a political maneuver designed to avoid taking sides, the Justice Department stopped short of saying the firefighters' case should be dismissed, instead recommending that it be remanded to a lower court to determine if city's decision was a pretext for intentional discrimination.

Polls show varying levels of support for affirmative action programs.

In an AP-Yahoo poll conducted in December 2007 through January 2008, one-quarter of respondents favored affirmative action programs and 37 percent opposed them. Another 36 percent neither favored nor opposed them.

A September 2007 Pew poll, which did not give people the option to say they had no opinion, found that 46 percent of people said they favored affirmative action programs that give special preferences to qualified blacks in hiring and education, while 40 percent opposed such programs.

Last November, Colorado voters became the first in the nation to reject a ban on state affirmative action programs. Similar measures have been approved in Nebraska, California, Michigan and Washington.

Supreme Court observers predict the firefighters' lawsuit will be decided by a 5-4 margin, with Justice Kennedy casting the deciding vote.

His past decisions give hope to both sides.

In the recent Voting Rights Act decision that made it harder for some minority candidates to win election when voting districts are redrawn, Kennedy wrote in the majority opinion that "racial discrimination and racially polarized voting are not ancient history. Much remains to be done to ensure that citizens of all races have equal opportunity to share and participate in our democratic processes and traditions."

"It would be an irony, however," Kennedy continued, if civil rights laws were used to "entrench racial differences."

Edited April 22, 2009 by Dustdevil

[Katiebug]

it's the same test given to everyone. Everyone had equal notice for the test. Everyone had equal time and recources to pull from. Either you studied hard and were prepared, or you didn't. How could a test like that be discriminatory against a race of people? I have to call bullshit. Seriously.

Everyone had the same opportunity. Period.

[WolfmanHarris]

I find this very interesting and have some questions I wonder if anyone else has insight on.

Also, beneath the specific details of the firefighters' lawsuit lies an uncomfortable truth: On most standardized tests, regardless of the subject, blacks score lower than whites.

Do we have reasons for this? What research has been done to look into these causes? How do the results compare across racial lines when socio-economic position during upbringing is considered? Do middle-class blacks, or those who were raised in a family with two parents compare similarly to whites in the same situation? Is this then a matter or a larger proportion of black people being poor or having single parent situations?

The promotion exams were closely focused on firefighting methods, knowledge and skills. The first part had 200 multiple-choice questions and counted for 60 percent of the final score. Candidates returned another day to take an oral exam in which they described responses to various scenarios, which counted for 40 percent.

If the exam dealt entirely with firefighting, shouldn't all candidates be starting from the same background and training and thus be equally qualified for at least the multiple choice section which would have objective marking. I'm willing to concede that if there is any institutional racism that the oral exam may be tainted by it. Not saying it is, only that it's forseeable.

He says both the test and his fire department have hidden biases against minorities: The department is historically white, with the first blacks joining in 1957, and jobs, relationships, knowledge and choice assignments are passed on from friend to friend and generation to generation ... "I just call it 'the network,"' Tinney says.

The problem I have with this accusation is it's really hard to prove that there are closer personal relationships between white FF's to the exclusion of black FF's in terms of being friends and passing on knowledge and mentoring. And if it can be shown, what could anyone do? Regulate personal relationships? I'm not talking nepotism here; HR and corporate policies should be geared towards removing nepotism as much as possible. I just don't know how you tackle such an intangible as this.

"It's something that shakes what you believe in. Because you believe if you work hard, you're rewarded for that, and that's not necessarily the case," Marcarelli said.

It should be. Meritocracy should be the eventual goal. Yes we need a social safety net and yes efforts must be made to redress past mistakes, but in the end we must strive for a society that rewards hard work otherwise it will stagnate.

The exams were designed by a professional testing firm that followed federal guidelines for mitigating disparate racial outcomes, the plaintiffs say.

Anyone know what these guidelines are and where they can be found? What are they based on? I don't currently understand what about how a Firefighting exam is written causes disparate racial outcomes.

But after the results came back, the city says it found evidence that the tests were potentially flawed. Sources of bias included that the written section measured memorization rather than actual skills needed for the jobs; giving too much weight to the written section; and lack of testing for leadership in emergency conditions, according to a brief filed by officers of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology.

So the entirely objectively scored part was the flawed section? Wouldn't it be preferred for a department accused of having a culture of racism to have testing that removed any subjectivity from the brass, who must of course be complicit in the continuation of that racism?

"I'm sure there are numerous reasons why (blacks didn't do as well), and not because we're not as intelligent," Tinney says. "There's a lot of underlying issues to that ... these folks are saying, 'We studied the hardest, we passed the test, we should be promoted.' But they're not talking about all the other things."

Please, please tell me what these numerous reasons are or what all the other things are AND how we can factor them into a test AND have it be equally fair to all taking it. If the other factors are historical, them I don't know how a test could redress these without writing "If you're a minority please add 20% now." Which is not fair to anyone, least of all the minority candidates who would have to face the clear implication that they cannot possibly pass the test on their own merits.

This is why I get frustrated by the news when stories like this are covered. Tonnes of unsupported claims on both sides. If you have already taken a side there's enough there to feed into whatever opinion you previously held. If you don't have a strongly held stance, you're just way more friggin confused.

- Matt

[Katiebug]

Now wait a minute. The article says that the test was biased because too much emphasis was placed on memorization and written skills. To say that those skills should not be emphasized on a test taken by multiple cultures is racist in itself. Don't you think? It's simple. Study and educate yourself or fail. That is something everyone on this forum is familiar with.

[crotchitymedic1986]

The reason we blacks score lower on standardized tests is because of a little thing called slavery -- you do remember that ? If you dont, let me also remind you that blacks were not allowed to attend white schools and universities until the 1960s. That puts us about 200 years behind whites in the US, and you have to remember that the first generations of black students did not have an educated family at home to assist them with their studies.

Then you also have to understand that many questions that you find easy on a standardized test, are not so easy for blacks. For instance:

Coffee cup is to saucer as napkin is to __________________ (table cloth, toaster, salad fork, or butter dish).

Sounds easy enough, but when you are a poor child (regardless of race), you may have never seen a coffee cup, saucer, table cloth, salad fork, or butter dish in your home.

I understand why whites do not like quotas, but at the same time, look around your department and see how many african american officers you have ?

If you go to Mcdonalds and they serve you the wrong hamburger, you dont go to Burger King for your refund. Whites held our race back for 100s of years in the US, now you have to pay for your wrongs. And yes I realize that it was not you personally who enslaved us, but it will take generations for us to catch up to whites.

[JPINFV]

^

I believe the proper term is "European American."

/or you can call me white if I can call you black.

[p3medic]

The reason we blacks score lower on standardized tests is because of a little thing called slavery -- you do remember that ? If you dont, let me also remind you that blacks were not allowed to attend white schools and universities until the 1960s. That puts us about 200 years behind whites in the US, and you have to remember that the first generations of black students did not have an educated family at home to assist them with their studies.

Then you also have to understand that many questions that you find easy on a standardized test, are not so easy for blacks. For instance:

Coffee cup is to saucer as napkin is to __________________ (table cloth, toaster, salad fork, or butter dish).

Sounds easy enough, but when you are a poor child (regardless of race), you may have never seen a coffee cup, saucer, table cloth, salad fork, or butter dish in your home.

I understand why whites do not like quotas, but at the same time, look around your department and see how many african american officers you have ?

If you go to Mcdonalds and they serve you the wrong hamburger, you dont go to Burger King for your refund. Whites held our race back for 100s of years in the US, now you have to pay for your wrongs. And yes I realize that it was not you personally who enslaved us, but it will take generations for us to catch up to whites.

The test was about firefighting, not fine dining. All the candidates are firefighters, that recieved the same training and had the same ability to study the information on the exam. The position they are testing for is one that requires the requisite knowledge and leadership ability. They will be required to make decisions that could cost someone their life, and if they don't possess the knowledge to make a sound decision they shouldn't be in that position, regardless of their shade of gray. Does the British gov't owe me a handout because my potato growing family was starved into emigrating to another country? How about the Native Americans, do they get their land back? The injustices of the past shouldn't result in reverse injustices in the present.

[WolfmanHarris]

Crotchity, I think you touched on the essence of my questions in two areas.

If we take race out of the equation do we see comparable results across racial lines when socio-economic status or even family education is used?

How can a test be written to overcome this without essentially handing an increased grade to minority applicants?

Slavery is a much a generalization here and doesn't do the issue justice as it is when talking about the civil war. It simplifies a complex issue and boils it down to buzz words. For example it doesn't address continued immigration from Africa and the Caribbean and how that hasn't significantly changed test results? Why is that when these people are coming from there own countries? Perhaps we need to look to past colonialism more than slavery as the source of problems like test scores? Seems to me like this not only considers the bigger picture but creates a far less exclusionary model for redress.

[mobey]

Crotchity, I think you touched on the essence of my questions in two areas.

If we take race out of the equation do we see comparable results across racial lines when socio-economic status or even family education is used?

This is a great point. My interpretation of crotchity's post, is that all african americans should write a "dumbed down" test because they are poor. Whaaa????

I know many wealthy educated african americans!

I also know ALOT of poor poverty stricken, uneducated caucasions.

I do not have a single family member whom has graduated Gr 12. I am caucasion. We had to sell the family farm and move in 1990 so the bank did not reposess it. We were.... by todays standards "Poor". Should I get to write the simpler test??

[emtannie]

The reason we blacks score lower on standardized tests is because of a little thing called slavery -- you do remember that ? If you dont, let me also remind you that blacks were not allowed to attend white schools and universities until the 1960s. That puts us about 200 years behind whites in the US, and you have to remember that the first generations of black students did not have an educated family at home to assist them with their studies.

Then you also have to understand that many questions that you find easy on a standardized test, are not so easy for blacks. For instance:

Coffee cup is to saucer as napkin is to __________________ (table cloth, toaster, salad fork, or butter dish).

Sounds easy enough, but when you are a poor child (regardless of race), you may have never seen a coffee cup, saucer, table cloth, salad fork, or butter dish in your home.

I understand why whites do not like quotas, but at the same time, look around your department and see how many african american officers you have ?

If you go to Mcdonalds and they serve you the wrong hamburger, you dont go to Burger King for your refund. Whites held our race back for 100s of years in the US, now you have to pay for your wrongs. And yes I realize that it was not you personally who enslaved us, but it will take generations for us to catch up to whites.

I'm not buying the "little thing called slavery" excuse... and to me, that is what it is - an excuse. My family came to Canada from Russia, with nothing but the clothes on their back, in 1926. When they arrived in Canada, they were stripped of their clothes, hosed down, and all members, including women were "inspected" and had their heads shaved, to prove that they didn't have lice. My family were essentially slaves in Russia - the government came and took family members in the middle of the night, and those members were never seen again. They were not allowed education. They were not allowed to work certain jobs. They were not allowed to own property, vehicles, or other assets. Children were removed from their mother's homes at the whim of the government, and sent to work in camps and for armies, and wer never seen again.

They came to Canada where they were discriminated against, not allowed to get jobs, and not allowed to work or live in certain areas, because of the bias against Russians due to the war. They did not speak English. They could not communicate. They had no resources.

Members of my family starved. Members of my family suffered debiltating illnesses due to malnutrition and poor environment. Members of my family were abused. A member of my family was murdered in the early 1930's for being seen in public with a man that members of the community felt was above her social status.

My family worked hard, overcame obstacles, and pushed each other and their children to learn, to be successful, and to educate themselves and work hard. They did not use the "my ancestors were slaves, and were mistreated both in this country and our homeland" as an excuse for not doing as well in school or in the workplace. In my family, not doing as well meant that you weren't trying hard enough. I have 30 first cousins on my mother's side. Everyone of us grew up in poverty. Every one of us completed high school. 24 of us have university degrees. Six are doctors. We didn't get special funding because of our skin color. We didn't get priority treatment or reserved places in school or in work because of our ancestry. We didn't get "all-Russian" colleges or universities. We didn't get special grant funding or scholarships because of our skin color or our ancestry. We all worked and paid our own way. We all got to where we are because of our work, not because we claimed a special status because of the atrocities our ancestors lived through.

I don't have to "right the wrongs" supposedly done to the children and grandchildren of black slaves. Those children and granchildren can do the same thing that my family has done. No one is "out to get them" and no one is trying to set them back. They are doing it themselves by using the "my ancestors were slaves" as an excuse.