Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-16-2012, 02:35 PM
 
5,365 posts, read 6,337,762 times
Reputation: 3360

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by blackandproud View Post
This has nothing to do with affirmative action. What are you people not getting. The City had a mandate in place outlining the requirments. The City then decided they were going to include an addendum mid way to those requirements. Thats unfair. Had they stated in their requirements that the person with the HIGHEST score is the most qualified, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.
I am sure that in the future, the fire department will be stating just that in their highering qualifications.

But then blacks will probably complain to the courts again that they are being discriminated against.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-16-2012, 02:41 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,630 posts, read 19,418,524 times
Reputation: 6462
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
I have a question for right wingers on this board.

Let's just say we for grins, we have a hiring system in the US where all jobs go to the most qualified.

Obviously, we are going to have a group that is not hired.

According to our own government reports, we have 4 unemployed for every 1 job available.

Job Openings and Labor Turnover Summary

What do propose to do with these people that are not qualified for our jobs that we have available. There are no jobs left for them. They can go screw themselves?
There are crops that are currently being picked by illegals they can start there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 02:42 PM
 
5,365 posts, read 6,337,762 times
Reputation: 3360
Quote:
Originally Posted by nighttrain55 View Post
I suggest they not change the criteria midway through the process if they don't want to get criticism. It should have 89+ from the beginning.
Why can't it be flexible?

You can never be sure of how applicants will perform on a test. That is why you need to have criteria such as "65 and above will be considered". 89% is a high mark to make. I am sure that the administrators of this test didn't foresee the high scores that the non-black fire fighters would achieve.

This is the way it is in all walks of life. I am currently applying for entry level jobs right now out of college. The requirements for highering consideration for the positions I am going for right now all pretty much state that just a college degree and less than 2 years of relevent experience are required. I have met these qualifications, but their are many others who are applying for the same job that exceed their qualifications, which is why I am still not employed. The applicants who exceed the requirements the most are going to get a job first. Should I run to court and scream discrimination over this?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 02:45 PM
 
Location: Metro-Detroit area
4,050 posts, read 3,959,677 times
Reputation: 2107
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Can you point us to a black candidate that understands that the best of the best is how hiring standards are usually carried out?
Obviously you were unable to answer the question, never mind, I didn't expect you would.

NEXT!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 02:45 PM
 
3,504 posts, read 3,923,793 times
Reputation: 1357
Fair ruling. Cant say 65 is ok, but then change it to 89.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 02:46 PM
 
5,365 posts, read 6,337,762 times
Reputation: 3360
Quote:
Originally Posted by reconmark View Post
So once again an obviously illiterate group of white people misread or is unable to comprehend the article they attempted to read, and ignorantly goes off on an tangent that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

I guess city-data can add one more to the "clueless" category.

Can any rational person please point me to the affirmative action issue that was quoted in the article???..anyone??
How is this not affirmative action? A court mandated that the highering standards be lowered to meet a racial quota. Its no different than what universities do to bring in higher numbers of minorities.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 02:48 PM
 
Location: Maryland
18,630 posts, read 19,418,524 times
Reputation: 6462
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackandproud View Post
This has nothing to do with affirmative action. What are you people not getting. The City had a mandate in place outlining the requirments. The City then decided they were going to include an addendum mid way to those requirements. Thats unfair. Had they stated in their requirements that the person with the HIGHEST score is the most qualified, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation.
So what about the white and Hispanic test takers who got caught on the other side of the addedum. How did this become a racial discrimination case? Only Black firefighters who scored above 66 did not get hired?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 02:48 PM
 
3,504 posts, read 3,923,793 times
Reputation: 1357
Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneTraveler View Post
How is this not affirmative action? A court mandated that the highering standards be lowered to meet a racial quota. Its no different than what universities do to bring in higher numbers of minorities.
Standards werent lowered. They said 65 makes you qualified, and then made up the 89 number. They should've said 89 only from the beginning.

Fair ruling.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 02:49 PM
 
78,416 posts, read 60,593,823 times
Reputation: 49699
Quote:
Originally Posted by padcrasher View Post
What are you disputing? Are you tap dancing now? Did I get into why there is racial disparity in test scores? No.

I said whites and asians "as groups" score higher in aptitude/iq tests that blacks and hispanics.

Run along now. You have no studies that contradict this. There is no such data.
Presenting biased "results" without mentioning the caveats doesn't get you a free pass for the intentional omission.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-16-2012, 02:50 PM
 
3,504 posts, read 3,923,793 times
Reputation: 1357
Quote:
Originally Posted by EdwardA View Post
So what about the white and Hispanic test takers who got caught on the other side of the addedum. How did this become a racial discrimination case? Only Black firefighters who scored above 66 did not get hired?
Became racial because it had a disparate outcome against blacks.

Blacks were qualified and didn't get hired.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 03:01 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top