Female recruits pass NEW pt test

Discussion in 'Civil Service' started by PBC FL Cop, Nov 25, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. PBC FL Cop

    PBC FL Cop Subscribing Member

    Saturday, November 25, 2006
    Female recruits pass wall test

    Alteration may have fixed bias

    By Milton J. Valencia TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
    WORCESTER— The three female police recruits hoping to join the local police academy recently passed a state-required physical abilities test, indicating that a changed climbing wall in the test may have mitigated possible gender bias.

    Two more female police recruits may take the test soon. And with Boston police — the only other department to send recruits to the test — seeing its female recruits pass at better rates than before, concerns that the test was discriminatory seem to have been resolved.

    “I think the adjustment made a big difference,” Police Chief Gary J. Gemme said.

    At issue was a significant disparity between men and women recruits who passed the test, which includes an obstacle course and several other physical tests meant to reflect work police do. Statewide statistics show that 92 percent of the men who took the test in recent years passed, compared to 30 percent of women. In the last Worcester recruit class, none of the six women recruits passed. In Boston, 11 of the 23 women who took the test earlier this year passed.

    The statistics triggered concerns that the test discriminated against women, particularly at a time when police departments across the state are trying to diversify their forces by hiring more women police officers.

    Police departments from Boston to Fall River and Worcester sent letters to the state calling for a review of the exam, and state Sen. Edward M. Augustus Jr., D-Worcester, led a legislative effort to help fund a review of the exam. Officials said they didn’t want to create advantages for women, but that any test with such a disparity in results needed a review.

    After the review, state officials changed the dynamics of a wall in the obstacle course. Concerns with the test had focused on the wall, and the adjustment seems to have allayed those concerns.

    Previously, the 5-foot wall had a straight, smooth surface.

    Women often had difficulty scaling the wall, and even those who could said it drained from them the energy needed to finish other parts of the obstacle course within the required time. Some women completed the course just seconds beyond the deadline.

    Those who complained about the wall said it gave men an immediate advantage because men generally have the natural upper body strength needed to pull themselves over it. The wall required upper body strength because its straight surface allowed for no foot leverage.

    Those who criticized the test, led by Chief Gemme, argued that the wall was an immediate disadvantage for women. Plus, they argued that the wall was an unrealistic reflection of police work. Rarely do officers encounter a five-foot wall with no foothold. Chief Gemme even argued that he would discourage officers from blindly scaling a five-foot wall anyway.

    Chief Gemme contended that recruits shouldn’t be judged on their fitness for the job solely on a five-foot wall. He said one of the female recruits in the last police class is a U.S. Army soldier serving oversees, even though she couldn’t scale the wall.

    The state review of the test led to a recent change in the wall. It now has two braces providing for foot leverage, making it easier to scale. A spokesman for the state administration said the wall is now a more realistic reflection of actual police work, because it is made more like a fence, something officers are more likely to encounter in their work settings.

    Boston police even endorsed the test after seeing 68 percent of their female recruits in a recent class pass.

    Chief Gemme has endorsed the change, saying improved statistics, after one minor adjustment, shows there was a problem with the original test.

    The chief said he still has his concerns with the overall testing process, saying he should be able to train recruits before they’re required to take the test, which he said should be called a graduation requirement.

    He plans to express that idea at a statewide meeting Wednesday, called a “stakeholders” meeting with representatives from police departments across the state. The meeting is part of a continuing job analysis project to review the abilities test.

    If this tests proves too difficult they're talking about a new pt test, which allows the applicant to walk around the wall instead of going over it. That should eliminate the bias against lazy, fat bastards, which apparently exists now in the law enforcement profession.
  2. Wildbill

    Wildbill MassCops Member

    The current test too easy. They should go back to the Cooper Test. To make it any easier it just wrong. If they went back to the Cooper Standards you would not see new cops on the street, who are fat and look horrible in uniform, after just graduating from the Police Academy.
  3. 94c

    94c Subscribing Member

    In related news, in order to shave time off the 1.5 mile run,
    Worcester will be providing wheel chairs for what is now a downhill run.

    More to follow on Eyewitness news at 5.
  4. HPD104

    HPD104 MassCops Member

    What a joke!
  5. Wolfman

    Wolfman "Ultima Ratio Civis" Staff Member

    "Discriminatory test" - what horseshit.

    By its very nature, every test can be deemed discriminatory against those who are unable to pass it. Is the SAT "discriminatory" against idiots? Is the driver's license test "discriminatory" against bad drivers? Is a physical fitness test discriminatory against those who are not fit enough to pass it?

    Welcome to the world of the lowest common denominator.
  6. Mitpo62

    Mitpo62 Subscribing Member

    What message, if any, is conveyed to those females over the years that passed the test as it was? I think someone just opened up pandora's box.....:pinch:
  7. Deuce

    Deuce screw you...

    Fu**ing can't c*nt no load geek azzhOle!! That's it, typical POG nocom.. What a fu**ing PC pu**y answer, lower the standards.. No street cred, IOD loving, chairborne REMF...
    Well let's see we already have a deaf guy on the job, hey chief how about a blind cop? These tests are definitely biased towards blind people, right? And it's against the law to deny a job based on age. Come on chiefy drop the biased age discrimination so my grandfather can get on the job. Hell he's only 86, he can get over the wall w/ a little help too..

    :up_yours:
  8. EBPD240

    EBPD240 MassCops Member

    "indicating that a changed climbing wall in the test may have mitigated possible gender bias."


    Yeah, its called being really fat!!!!!
  9. misconceived

    misconceived is Goin down the bah

    :L:
  10. Simon

    Simon Guest

    I heard the next step will be a take home PAT exam........ You just need a witness to sign saying they watched you climb the wall at home.
  11. Macop

    Macop Subscribing Member

    What a joke.
  12. smilly217

    smilly217 MassCops Member

    Well considering the obstacle course is a joke anyways, it really doesn't matter that they put steps on the wall. That course is one of the easiest things I've ever seen. The way I look at it, is yeah it gets them in the academy, but it doesn't get them through the academy. It's giving people a false sense of security because then you'll fall flat on your face when you go to the academy and they have you running each day and doing PT for hours a day. They should just do the timed 1 1/2 mile run in 12:00 at the most and then some other type of little tests, this way you can't say it's biased or other garbage because it's a simple test.
  13. Deuce

    Deuce screw you...

    No no, chief gemme now wants the candidates to draw a wall w/ pencil and paper. But if you can't draw that's ok he'll train you before the test....
  14. Tackleberry22

    Tackleberry22 MassCops Member

    I knew this was coming. They got past phase 1. Let's see if they can survive the 6 month academy. Some how I have a feeling that the Chief will pull out most of the stops to keep the women in the academy. However, If they drop out, is the academy now biased??? [-X
  15. 94c

    94c Subscribing Member

    Within the first month the department has already invested too much time and money into the recruit. Short of them getting arrested, while in the academy, they will be carried through. Guaranteed.
  16. 209

    209 MassCops Member

    So what about fat males...can they use the step too. I mean I can understand a mild assistance for females but it seems as though they should just elimate the wall altogether for females.

    Then again after you complete the academy what does fitness matter. There should be some sort of state standardized way to monitor Officers fitness throughout their careers. Military has the right idea. Fat out of shape cops are a liablity unless they are riding a desk.
  17. Deuce

    Deuce screw you...


    I agree, unfortunately we're seeing the reprocussions of nonvet police chiefs that just don't get it...

  18. extremesgs

    extremesgs MassCops Member

    if the job functions and requirements are the same for males and females, then the test should be exactly the same for both. There is no reason this should be otherwise.

    Females (and fat males, etc. etc.- not to single them out...) are required to do the same things on this job. That being said, why would anyone get preference when it comes to testing their ability to perform certain physical tasks? They don't get preferences or accomodations made on the street. This, of course, is assuming that the "tasks" in question are relevant to the job funtions.

    Interesting article relating to this topic:

    http://www.policeone.com/health-fitness/articles/1192300
  19. DVET1979

    DVET1979 MassCops Member

    I agree, the test should be uniform for both men and women police applicants. I dont see how climbing a wall is discriminatory. Alot of people are kicking the age question around here as well. Frankly I dont understand why the age limit is cut off at 32 for many departments when you can stay on until you are at least 65.
  20. ferus fidelitas

    ferus fidelitas MassCops Member

    I went to the academy when it was required to pass pushup, sit up, run, obstacle course, weight lift etc... there was no wall or trigger pull. My question is regarding the new p a t standards... my understanding is that people under the new physical standards are required to re pass them every year... I know guys on the job for 10 yrs under the new standards that have never been required to pass the p a t again... does any police department make guys pass the p a t yearly.. ? that was suppose to be the requirement. Is it eally required, ... anywhere ?
  21. OutOfManyOne

    OutOfManyOne Subscribing Member

    Well, which one is it, either the PAT test or the Cooper test?
  22. ferus fidelitas

    ferus fidelitas MassCops Member

    OMO , look up your tag in Latin... cool name.. :) .... I can't compare the Cooper Test to the P A T - didn't even know that it was called "Cooper".. by all accounts the so called Cooper Test was far more difficult... whatever... I know many excellent officers who took the p a t .. being a police officer obviously involves the physical, but many who passed the lesser physical standards avoid battlle with their coolness, life experience, reasonableness and ability to communicate effectively.. composure matters more than how many push up's you can do ... 6 men in a can (oc) covers most physical battles.. How can anyone compare the two standards if they only took and passed 1 of them..?
  23. girlcop21

    girlcop21 MassCops Member

    First of all, is that language really necessary? Some of us just don't know how to have a mature discussion... grow up.

    Secondly, I am a female officer (obviously by my sceen name) who happened to fail the PAT the first time around and then a week later passesthe test and have been a successful police officer for 5 years. I do think that the PAT is biased towards females in some areas solely because there are some elements at which a male would have the advantage based solely upon their physical skills. (ie; upper body strength) I have seen both men and women alike fail the test, but that doesn't mean that because they fail the test that they will be bad police officers. Yes, there are plenty of overweight individuals on all of our departments, but some of them (emphasis on the word some) are also pretty damn good cops too. Just because I failed the test the first time around was certainly not an indication of what type of cop I would have been, or who I am today. My last comment is that I did not see anything in that article that specifically stated that only women would be the ones to use the steps on that wall. If it is the case that men are excluded from using them, I would say that would be offering an advantage to women and that men should also be able to use them. I bet when they start giving this new format, there will be just as many men who use the steps as there are women.

    The PAT is just a test for physical ability and it is not a true test of how someone will be on the job. At this point, I can think of a few people that I went to the academy with or have worked with on the street that passed the PAT but have no business being on the job... how do you solve that problem?
  24. ferus fidelitas

    ferus fidelitas MassCops Member

    Girl cop (Lady) is right - I know several female officers who are far more effective than some of their male, bodybuilding, military haircut colleagues... The job is about good judgement and common sense ....oc nullifies 99% of a punk's resistance... that's been my experience.. if they are obtuse... simply spray them, nail them and cuff them.. works most of the time 'til help arrives.... Being composed and reasonable avoids 80-90% of physical battles anyways.. if you want respect... show it
  25. extremesgs

    extremesgs MassCops Member

    Keep in mind that any physical "test" is one of a battery of testing that is done to ensure the candidate can pass the generic standards that have been set.

    Plenty of people can kick ass on a PAT and suck on the job, while others may suck at the PAT and be great at the job.

    I think we'd all agree that any test (physical or otherwise) needs to be based on specific function (similar to the MA PAT) or standards derived from presumption of what some call "fitness" (i.e. Cooper standards). Whatever the case, testing of all kinds needs to be the same for all who are going through the process. Set a standard. They pass or fail, or its scored. If climbing over a wall is biased against shorter candidates, then look at the practical application of it- will they have a need to climb a 5, 7, or 10 foot wall on the street? I've never had to. How bout a fence instead? Been there, done that, right? Might be a good one to add. Lets look at MSP- getting over a "jersey barrier" as part of a test. Are you likely to have to get over one of those? You betcha (for SP anyway). Practical application. Pulling the trigger of a gun? If you can't do that when you get to the range, they'll make it so you can. As for being part of a test, it seems silly.

    Someone needs to come up with standards based on Tasks, and every candidate should be able to either pass or fail, based on a single pass or fail standard. Not age categories, not sex categories, not fat and skinny categories. That's not to say any standards should be lowered, but pick things that any officer may have to do on any day. A dummy drag is a good instance of this; the average male supposedly weights 180 lbs. Statistically, more cops are male than female. If an officer gets injured (more likley male based on statistics), someone may need to drag them to a safe area. Things like that...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page