Chicago Ordered to Hire 111 Black Firefighters

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


I do live in Hawaii and it is a bit more complicated than that. There are real cultural issues with respect to education, marriage and age of child rearing among groups that are certainly factors in the make-up of the socio-economic population here. The history of Hawaii certainly has serious periods of racism, notably toward the Chinese and subsequently the Japanese. I've lived all over the world though and Hawaii, other than the Hawaiian vs. Haole business is the least racist place I've ever lived. Hawaii is the very definition of a mixed race society.

The attitudes of Hawaiians towards Haole's is serious though in many parts of Hawaii, especially in certain towns on Oahu. That nastiness is largely initiated by the Hawaiians, not the Haoles

reply to post by dolphinfan


You missed the point. In Hawaii, certain governmental type jobs, (the post office, for example) have a much higher ratio of Japanese employees than you would expect, based on the population.

Im not saying that the Japanese and Chinese are being discriminated against. Im saying that its a well known truth that Japanese people prefer to hire other Japanese people. And they do. And its not really all that subtle. And my friends talk openly about it. Even my Japanese friends.

What I am saying is, that one reason you dont hear of people complaining about things being skewed towards other ethnic groups is because you have to be in the right place to do so. (They have to have enough power to skew things for their group,) and clearly, you also have to have the ability to notice it.

Even when I pointed it out, you immediately went to white racism against Asians, and that wasnt where I was going AT ALL. The Japanese are very nationalistic, and yes, racist. Its not really a big secret.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


I'm sorry but think I missed the point of your prior post.

I agree that groups tend to self identify and hire folks with whom they are comfortable, I don't think its racist in most cases, just a natural disposition. Of course it does come down to racism in some cases that varies between groups and I would suggest that the Japanese are among the groups where it is the highest.

Much of the Japanese and Chinese communities in Hawaii are very insular. They form tight knit communities and in a lot of cases don't totally mix outside of those communities. For example, I have a number of kids who play youth sports and I coach a lot. I've never had a 100% Japanese or Chinese kid come out for a team. They play at recess and play well, but simply don't play organized sports. I don't think its a lack of interest and I don't think its a desire to push their kids so hard on the academic front that they don't have the time, I think it is because their parents don't care to mix. These are great kids who mix perfectly in school, but once outside of school, they go into this purely Japanese or Chinese world. The same happens with Hawaiians.

Hawaii is in a lot of cases, a mix of people who don't mix.

I also agree that there is a lot of racism in Japan. I've spent a lot of time in Japan and it is blatant, especially towards the other Asian groups. I have a friend of Korean decent who was born and raised in Japan. He's a fantastic gent and he is a complete outsider in the office. The Japanese guys will not even ask the gent out for lunch or a beer when they go, although they will readily ask white and blacks out. Many of them simply think Koreans inferior.

It certainly is unfortunate, and the notion of looking to practice freedom of association with respect to employment needs to be guarded against, but that does not justify the establishment of quotas, race norming, affirmative action, lowering of standards or any of that social justice rubbish. If I had a gent on my team that was obviously only hiring folks of a certain demographic background or excluding people because of race, religion, sexual orientation, handicap, etc. I would move him out of management, period.

Originally posted by dolphinfan

I also agree that there is a lot of racism in Japan. I've spent a lot of time in Japan and it is blatant, especially towards the other Asian groups.

Exactly. Koreans are loathed by many Japanese. And it is racism. A rose by any other name............still stinks of racism. And its not limited to Europeans, of course. You see it between Europeans as well, as in the case of the English and Irish.

Originally posted by dolphinfan
I would move him out of management, period.

You would if you held a different view. And I do believe that you do hold a different view, and that you would indeed, move that person out of management.

However. You are a member of a group that has traditionally not been discriminated against in your lifetime.

Imagine yourself in a place where Hawaiians had ALL the power. And you were poor, but worthy. And they were nasty and violent towards you, and even going to the police got you some level of a brush off, and in front of you, they basically told the perpetrator, "We will take care of this" and shook his hand, and then they kept you for hours and then kindly "let" you go home not charged with anything, but doing nothing to address your complaints.

Your whole world is this way. You have no way to ever be anything other than haole crap. Ever. You are lucky if you get a menial job, and the idea you would be offered a job where your real skill, intelligence and ability would shine is laughable. Not only that, but the system is set up in such a way that you always make only what it necessary to keep you out of jail, but you are always in debt. No chance to start your own business.

Do you still think that SOMEONE intervening to force society past this "way it is" is so horrible? I dont.

I think it has/had a time, and a place, and that it served a real function. And I think for the most part, that time and place and function are over. But not in all places. And not in all circumstances.

I am, as you can imagine, growing up in Waianae, well aware that racism towards whites is a fact. And I of course dont buy into the "evil white person" line of crap. And of all people, I hope you can see that I am not the type who will jump on the "poor minority" bandwagon. But I do believe in looking hard at all circumstances and evaluating each case on its own merits, and I do believe that when racism is institutional, justice IS served by forcing an end to the institution.

I think that this is more a case of the Fire Department moving the goalposts for the preliminary entrance exam.

The exam was more of a basic aptitude test requiring a minimum score of 65 to progress to the random hiring stage. Scoring highly on this initial test did not necessarily indicate that the candidate was more suitable for the job.

If a higher proportion of black people scored between 65-88, then those who were responsible for the decision to change the minimum score requirements may well have been motivated to do so because of underlying racial prejudice.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


I agree. And if they did, ( as they were busted doing in the EMS exams) hand out old copies of the test to select candidates, they could assure themselves that most of the people in that upper scoring region would be the people they wanted to hire in the first place.

Originally posted by xstatic
is this not in american history x? sounds like just complete b.s. we have a black president now and still there is this reverse racism?

Racism is racism...reverse racism would imply that you are not racist.
2nd.

Originally posted by Grumble

Originally posted by DuceizBack


I don't agree with affirmative action, but it's definitely needed.
So many closet racist in the world, that they would stop people of color from being successful because they're that hateful.

Exactly right.

If affirmative action were obliterated (as it should be) then the people not getting jobs because of their colour/race/sex would be able to bring lawsuits against the companies that would not hire them if they had the right qualifications for the job.

Affirmative action does nothing but keep racism rampant. It denigrates the people that accept such an idiotic idea and it keeps people looking down on them as other, more qualified people, are out of jobs. By saying you agree with affirmative action, in my opinion, you are saying that racism and inequality amongst people are good for society.

reply to post by Illusionsaregrander


Yes, after reading the first couple of pages of this thread, I think that a lot of people are misinterpreting what actually happened here.

For a start, as far as I can see, this has got nothing to do with affirmative action. The original test was fair, without giving any race, or races, preferential treatment. What's unfair is that they moved the goalposts and upped the minimum score required to progress to the next stage of potential employment, which meant that most of the black applicants were disqualified from any chance of securing a job as a firefighter.

I think that is the point that a lot of people are missing. This isn't a case of ''your tests are discriminatory because black people are disproportionately failing them'', but more a case of ''your actions are discriminatory because you altered your test standards to invalidate most of the black candidates''.

The judge certainly was of that opinion, and she would have heard far more evidence and testimonies relating to this case than any of us have. Not that that makes the decision necessarily correct, but it probably would have required some strong evidence to actually successfully prove these allegations.

Everyone missed it; it is so easy to see that this is Ritualistic Magic afoot. This may not be the focal point but it certainly is the fodder and the screen.

The number 11 is Illumination. It is Fire, Center Stage, the Light, Messages, and considered the first of the Mastery Vibrations. It is the ability to see and reflect within the core of the emotion.

The 111 is a triangulated focused Force of this Illumination. Should it be broken down to its most basic number? The number 3? No, it is within a harmonic that by dismissing it like that it is like seeing nothing in the reflection.

Firemen you say? Of course Fire with 111; perhaps a Sacrifice is at hand! Rewarding the sacrificed and their families because they will have to pay the ultimate price; this makes sense as it does seem like a reward, but for what? Color? Color is a cloak over what is really inside. Let the 11 show you the Truth!

Hasn't there been talk of a Nuke on American soil? Chicago has been mentioned by some. I could even recollect reading about a Nuke setting off the New Madrid some how; Chicago certainly would be a key position for that.

Something about the entire 111 is speaking of Ritualism and given the timeliness of events these days and the "air of prophesies", I am almost inclined to duck and cover! My guess is that there will be an Officiating celebration? Oh that's right, this is pre-Mayorship to commence on Monday; it certainly seals the deal with Fire for Rahm!

Too Spooky! I always felt this was handed to Rahm! Another Reward! Perhaps another Sacrifice!

At least this was my interpretation because I cannot see the difference in color but Man shows his colors all too easily!

this seems so ridiculous...we live in such strange times

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


You are right, because the judge did not even consider, like I did, that there may have been a reason certain people ended up in that upper scoring region and not others. Because the judge, unlike us, could not consider facts not part of the actual case, such as what they found out about cheating in the department on other tests, and how that was carried out.

It might have been much more than just moving the goal post, but I cant prove that. I can only show that people in the department had been caught doing that on other tests, and suggest that there may be a very good, very practical reason certain people out performed certain others.

Its actually a pretty clever strategy to cheat an "objective" method like testing, that I wouldnt have thought of if someone else hadnt caught them at it in another instance. (The EMS tests) But I DID know going into this that Chicago school teachers had been flat busted cheating test scores and so I did decide to look for the possibility of some skewing of scores. The teachers used a different method.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
reply to post by Illusionsaregrander

 

Yes, after reading the first couple of pages of this thread, I think that a lot of people are misinterpreting what actually happened here.

For a start, as far as I can see, this has got nothing to do with affirmative action. The original test was fair, without giving any race, or races, preferential treatment. What's unfair is that they moved the goalposts and upped the minimum score required to progress to the next stage of potential employment, which meant that most of the black applicants were disqualified from any chance of securing a job as a firefighter.

I think that is the point that a lot of people are missing. This isn't a case of ''your tests are discriminatory because black people are disproportionately failing them'', but more a case of ''your actions are discriminatory because you altered your test standards to invalidate most of the black candidates''.

The judge certainly was of that opinion, and she would have heard far more evidence and testimonies relating to this case then any of us have. Not that that makes the decision necessarily correct, but it probably would have required some strong evidence to actually successfully prove these allegations.

Correct me if I am wrong but, I get from your statement that you are essentially saying that no criteria to be hired can be raised to allow for people with higher mental, physical, social development to be the "best of the best"? You would think that you would WANT people who are responsible for saving your life to be the best. I personally think that it should be raised to 95% to be considered for the job with a series of interviews to follow. This, of course, would be followed by a job with great job security, higher pay and great benefits.

Maybe I am just crazy, but, I would like the cream of the crop at the top of the list, especially if they are going to save my life or my family's lives.

If raising the "bar" invalidates people, oh well. Study harder and know your stuff. That is all there is to it. If you have already passed than good for you, but, the people on their way up should get a job based on merit, not on skin colour.

Edit: and it has EVERYTHING to do with affirmative action. If it was all one race on the planet, it wouldn't matter that 6,000 applicants didn't get 89%. The fact that they needed a racial quota is not hidden.

reply to post by superman2012


Some people have test anxiety and while very smart, just do poorly on tests. Some people have great short term memories, and can cram things in there, ace the test, and then months later have no real ability to tell you the information.

A test can be constructed based on baseball to test for your ability to play football.

You can pass out old copies of the test to some students, and not others.

Do you see what I am trying to say? Im not saying that its not good to want the best people in the job. Im saying that test scores are only part of that equation. And how the tests are written, administered, scored, there are a lot of factors in which those tests can become virtually meaningless as predictors of performance.

Math is one famous example. Women do more poorly almost across the board on SATs in math. BUT........they do just as well as their male peers in actual work in class. Or better.


fairtest.org...

According to Kessel and Linn, there is no question that the test is at fault. Summarizing more than a dozen studies of large student groups and specific institutions such as MIT, Rutgers and Princeton, they conclude that young women typically earn the same or higher grades as their male counterparts in math and other college courses despite having SAT-Math scores 30-50 points lower.

Do you want firemen with great test taking skills? Or firemen with great firefighting skills? They may not be the same thing.

Your argument seems to be solely based on the idea that doing well on that test means you are in fact, the best person for the job. But that isnt necessarily the case. There are lots of ways that doing well on that test can say virtually nothing about your real value as a firefighter, some of which I have argued in depth.

Originally posted by Illusionsaregrander
reply to post by superman2012

 

Some people have test anxiety and while very smart, just do poorly on tests. Some people have great short term memories, and can cram things in there, ace the test, and then months later have no real ability to tell you the information.

A test can be constructed based on baseball to test for your ability to play football.

You can pass out old copies of the test to some students, and not others.

Do you see what I am trying to say? Im not saying that its not good to want the best people in the job. Im saying that test scores are only part of that equation. And how the tests are written, administered, scored, there are a lot of factors in which those tests can become virtually meaningless as predictors of performance.

Math is one famous example. Women do more poorly almost across the board on SATs in math. BUT........they do just as well as their male peers in actual work in class. Or better.


fairtest.org...

According to Kessel and Linn, there is no question that the test is at fault. Summarizing more than a dozen studies of large student groups and specific institutions such as MIT, Rutgers and Princeton, they conclude that young women typically earn the same or higher grades as their male counterparts in math and other college courses despite having SAT-Math scores 30-50 points lower.

Do you want firemen with great test taking skills? Or firemen with great firefighting skills? They may not be the same thing.

Your argument seems to be solely based on the idea that doing well on that test means you are in fact, the best person for the job. But that isnt necessarily the case. There are lots of ways that doing well on that test can say virtually nothing about your real value as a firefighter, some of which I have argued in depth.

Fine. I will give you test anxiety, baseball to football tests ( ), and even cheating.

But, you will have to give me that both races discussed in this thread (black and white) are subject to the above. I have given you examples of blacks cheating as well as whites. You have been given examples of that Ricci fellow with dyslexia trying his damndest to pass while losing out to affirmative action.

What I think you fail to know is that, although we are only discussing the written part, there is a physical test as well. Most written tests are based on the practical side of the subject you are writing a test for (for employment). If you don't have the base knowledge and don't pass the written part of the test ( do you know how fire will react in different situations?) than that tells the person that you don't have the knowledge or intelligence needed for this job. If they were asking questions that were biased towards white people (and I will need sources) then I would understand why they are causing a big scene.

I would want a fireman/woman with great skills...unfortunately this comes with some knowledge and learning. They don't just throw you in the job and expect you to know how everything works. I took a weekend long course on SCBA and I still know I have more to learn. The first class I went to was 24 hours over 3 days of textbook reading. Again, you have to have the base knowledge before being able to be a greatly skilled fireman. Skill comes with practice, practice comes with knowing, knowing comes with studying.

I guess I didn't explain myself well enough for you. I don't think that the written test is the only basis that they should make...and they don't. But, it is a good barometer for knowing where your potential lifesaver is in his/her knowledge.

Originally posted by Sherlock Holmes
I think that is the point that a lot of people are missing. This isn't a case of ''your tests are discriminatory because black people are disproportionately failing them'', but more a case of ''your actions are discriminatory because you altered your test standards to invalidate most of the black candidates''.

You are only assuming here without any proof as a foundation, your only foundation is distrust in your fellow man
Also I think you are making a horrible assumption
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to hire the best of the best
There is nothing racial in that, this is an emergency response team, it's not a joke
People's lives are at stake so why not hire the best of the best?

You help pay for this emergency service and therefore should not want to advocate hiring or not hiring because of racial reasons, you should just want the best of the best

Originally posted by superman2012
Correct me if I am wrong but, I get from your statement that you are essentially saying that no criteria to be hired can be raised to allow for people with higher mental, physical, social development to be the "best of the best"? You would think that you would WANT people who are responsible for saving your life to be the best. I personally think that it should be raised to 95% to be considered for the job with a series of interviews to follow. This, of course, would be followed by a job with great job security, higher pay and great benefits.

This was an entrance exam, though. I certainly can't categorically say what this exam consisted of, but in many cases it is just a glorified literacy and numeracy aptitude test. The main aim of these are to weed out those who are practically illiterate or innumerate.

By their own measurements, they defined a score of 65 as enough to qualify a candidate for the next stage of employment.

Scoring 100 on this preliminary test did not indicate in any way that you would be the best person for the job of firefighter.

If they had wanted to only consider people who scored highly in the entrance exam, then they should have set the pass-score at an upper minimum.

Originally posted by superman2012
Maybe I am just crazy, but, I would like the cream of the crop at the top of the list, especially if they are going to save my life or my family's lives.

Once again, the score in the entrance exam was not an indicator of how good a firefighter the person would be.

There might have been a small, frail man, who could barely lift a sack of potatoes, scoring 100, while a muscle-bound athlete scored between 65-88. Yet, it would have been the smaller man who advanced to the next stage.

They already decided the minimum score that, by their own standards, proved initial competency.

Originally posted by superman2012
If raising the "bar" invalidates people, oh well. Study harder and know your stuff. That is all there is to it. If you have already passed than good for you, but, the people on their way up should get a job based on merit, not on skin colour.

It's not a question of ''studying harder''. Those who scored between 65-88 studied hard enough to pass the exams, regardless of their skin colour.

The bar was raised to disqualify most of the black candidates - that was what the judge ruled.

Originally posted by superman2012
and it has EVERYTHING to do with affirmative action. If it was all one race on the planet, it wouldn't matter that 6,000 applicants didn't get 89%. The fact that they needed a racial quota is not hidden.

It's nothing to do with affirmative action. If they had had a racial quota when hiring firefighters, then this court case wouldn't have even happened !

The whole point is that they raised the bar to invalidate most of the black candidates. If there was only one race on the planet, then they probably wouldn't have raised the bar in the first place.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
You are only assuming here without any proof as a foundation, your only foundation is distrust in your fellow man
Also I think you are making a horrible assumption

I'm basing it on other news reports about this case.

From an article in the Washington Post, it states:

in 2005 a federal judge said the test discriminated against black candidates. In her ruling the judge said the city knew the cutoff point was meaningless and would disproportionately exclude blacks from the pool of candidates most likely to be hired.

So, a federal judge ruled that the cut-off point was meaningless, and that they knew this would exclude most black people from the job.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to hire the best of the best
There is nothing racial in that, this is an emergency response team, it's not a joke
People's lives are at stake so why not hire the best of the best?

Scoring a certain number in an entrance exam does not indicate how suitable or not you'll be as a firefighter.

There must have been numerous people who scored between 65-88 who would have been better firefighters than those who scored 89+ and got employed.

By the fire department's own standards, scoring 65 was enough to show your initial proficiency before moving on to the next stage of tests.

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
You help pay for this emergency service and therefore should not want to advocate hiring or not hiring because of racial reasons, you should just want the best of the best

If I lived in Chicago, then I would want the best firefighters to be employed in the city. This is why I would be rather annoyed at them raising the score required at the entrance exam, which needlessly reduced the pool of potential talent that they could have chosen from.

The scum bags who originally did the hiring should be footing the bill, not the public, and intelligence is not required to be heroic and get the job done, I know a few who can pass most tests 100 percent, but would not ask them to change a tyre as they would not know how to. Do not give to much credence to fine marks in a test, when it comes to the real world, CDF is far more useful.

reply to post by ModernAcademia

Every so often I really feel like they are trying to stir a race war in the United States and that's why I posted this in BAN.

I agree.

I have also seen Racism starting to raise it's ugly head again.... Just in time for the next election cycle

What I would dearly love to see is these under-qualified firefighters sent (by themselves) to put out a fire at an "important" person's residence....

Unfortunately it will be the poor who suffer the most from this as they die horrible deaths.

I do not give a rats behind what color a person is but to intentionally put un-qualified people into a position where they endanger the lives of others is insane!