# Female specific hiring ?



## F23

Hey All I just Got my Results from the new list (96) and was wondering if anyone knows of a department looking for female recruits specifically.Thanks in advance for any positive info,Also I had listed Wellesley and Just discovered that they changed and are not a CS community anymore, so I will have to add another city/town and figured I would ask here for good suggestions.


----------



## 263FPD

Female Specific? No, not really. Being a female does not give you an upper hand advantage these days as far as most of the police departments are concerned. If you can speak another language, that would be an advantage. Otherwise, good luck.What town / city is your preference in?


----------



## Guest

263FPD said:


> Female Specific? No, not really. Being a female does not give you an upper hand advantage these days as far as most of the police departments are concerned.


We hired from a gender-specific list not too long ago.


----------



## 263FPD

We do not practice this BS.


----------



## F23

263FPD My residence preference is in Wrentham 
Delta did that happen to be Quincy ?
I was told by BPD HR that they specifically called for a Female test last year,and exhausted that list,But I'm really looking to just get my foot in the door even as a PI


----------



## 263FPD

Wrentham, I would imagine doesn't hire too heavily. I wish you the best. It is a tough time all around with hiring. My PD will lose a handful of guys in the next several months. We are screwed because we are short as it is.


----------



## CJIS

Are you a vet? Can you speak more than one language fluently? Do you have a degree? Are you also an EMT? While being a female may help in some towns basically you need a leg up on everyone in every category especially in this economy.


----------



## Guest

FF23 said:


> Delta did that happen to be Quincy ?


Yes indeed.


----------



## firefighter39

FF23 said:


> Hey All I just Got my Results from the new list (96) and was wondering if anyone knows of a department looking for female recruits specifically.Thanks in advance for any positive info,Also I had listed Wellesley and Just discovered that they changed and are not a CS community anymore, so I will have to add another city/town and figured I would ask here for good suggestions.


So what you are really saying is that you are not able to compete on an even playing field and want to leverage your gender to try and get a leg up over people who are more qualified than you.


----------



## Guest

firefighter39 said:


> So what you are really saying is that you are not able to compete on an even playing field and want to leverage your gender to try and get a leg up over people who are more qualified than you.


Just because someone scores lower on a standardized test doesn't make them less qualified than someone who scored higher. During my security/auxiliary police/SPO days, I worked with people who would have been fantastic full-time cops in Massachusetts, but they just didn't do well on standardized tests. Some went out-of-state, others gave up, but just because they couldn't score higher than (insert cutoff score here) doesn't mean they weren't qualified.

Unfortunately, politics being what it is, especially in Massachusetts, standardized testing is the best (although certainly not foolproof) safeguard we have against nepotism.


----------



## Guest

Q5-TPR said:


> Oh, get a fucking life! As did everyone else, you do and use EVERYTHING you can to get on the job. I did, and so did everyone else. Don't give me the even playing field bullshit. There is no such thing. FF23, use what ever you have to to get on the job and be the best cop you can be. Do the right thing, always, and don't take shit from nitwits, especially like ding ding over here. I have heard of alot of towns pulling gender lists. You would want to go to the bigger metro towns. And back to the fuckhead, how the fuck do you know if there are people more qualified than her? I know ALOT of unqualified motherfuckers on the job that have no buisness being there. Go back to playing with your hoses... Good luck FF23, but you may want to change your screen name so we don't think you are a retarded nozzle head...


About a 9 on the stress meter....deep breaths, Q-5......think happy thoughts!


----------



## HuskyH-2

Def put it in for boston. I know a few women who scored got 90-92 range, who recieved cards.


----------



## 263FPD

Q5, I am with you on that. Use whatever you can to get the job, but once you get it, do not become a lazy turd.


----------



## pahapoika

Boston PD all the way if you can get it.

there is a residency requirement, but worth it if you can swing it.

good luck !


----------



## firefighter39

Why should someone have to take advantage of being female, black, hispanic etc.. You are either qualified or not. The standards are there for a reason, I would not want a surgeon operating on me who got into medical school just fill some quota.


----------



## Guest

firefighter39 said:


> Why should someone have to take advantage of being female, black, hispanic etc.. You are either qualified or not.


I'm not arguing in favor or quotas, my point was that just because I scored a 99, that doesn't mean I was more qualified than the people who scored a 98. My brother couldn't get hired in MA because he's not a veteran and he doesn't do well on standardized tests , but he's a fully-qualified police officer out of state.



firefighter39 said:


> The standards are there for a reason, I would not want a surgeon operating on me who got into medical school just fill some quota.


Why do you think whenever I change PCP's or look for a specialist, I immediately go here;

Mass.Gov - Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine

After my kids were born, I was looking for pediatricians, and one woman seemed perfect until I looked her up, and found out she went to Fly-by-Night Medical School on some Carribbean island.

NEXT!!


----------



## firefighter39

Delta784 said:


> I'm not arguing in favor or quotas, my point was that just because I scored a 99, that doesn't mean I was more qualified than the people who scored a 98. My brother couldn't get hired in MA because he's not a veteran and he doesn't do well on standardized tests , but he's a fully-qualified police officer out of state.
> 
> Why do you think whenever I change PCP's or look for a specialist, I immediately go here;
> 
> Mass.Gov - Massachusetts Board of Registration in Medicine
> 
> After my kids were born, I was looking for pediatricians, and one woman seemed perfect until I looked her up, and found out she went to Fly-by-Night Medical School on some Carribbean island.
> 
> NEXT!!


I agree that standardized tests are not the perfect way, but isn't a female only list a quota? To say that you should hire one person ahead of someone else who scored higher just because one is a minority is just wrong. You should take your place on the list where ever your score falls and not look for a special quota to jump the list.


----------



## Guest

firefighter39 said:


> I agree that standardized tests are not the perfect way, but isn't a female only list a quota? To say that you should hire one person ahead of someone else who scored higher just because one is a minority is just wrong. You should take your place on the list where ever your score falls and not look for a special quota to jump the list.


Unless a department is under a consent decree, calling for a gender-specific (or race-specific) list isn't a quota, because a quota says you MUST hire a certain number of that group. Calling for a specific list means that the department WANTS to hire people from that group.

Having female police officers provides definite advantages (searching female suspects, talking to rape victims, etc.), and while their ranks have grown over the last 20 years (see my "Women in Policing" thread), there still aren't a lot of females who want to be cops, so maybe it is necessary to actively go after them.

I admit I rolled my eyes a bit when I heard we were calling a gender-specific list, but I trained three of them as an FTO, and they're all great cops who I have no problem with whatsoever. Of course it's easy for me to pontificate about this as I'm already on the job and never got screwed by a specific list request or quota, so I'm not really sure how I feel about it.

I will say this, though....as Q5 mentioned, don't hate the player, hate the game. In the unlikely event that a lot of people were bitching about veteran's preference when I got hired, you can be damn sure I was still going to submit my DD-214 at 1 Ashburton Place.


----------



## HistoryHound

I don't think anyone here would argue the appropriateness of veteran's preference. Anyone who has served the country, sacrificed time away from their family, friends and normal life, and been honorably discharged should get a bump to the top. That preference is something you earned. not something that is being handed to you because the circumstances of your life put you in a certain category. I really hadn't planned on posting here because I have never gone through the civil service process and have never considered doing so. But the more I thought about it, the more I thought that this really isn't much different than the kid with the "bionic" hand who posted not long ago. Wouldn't the advice be the same here? Don't go into it from the point of view "hire me because you don't have enough women". Go into it from the point of view that you are the best candidate regardless of gender. I just think if you set your sights on filling a special slot, you are doing yourself a disservice. We all know people who got on a job because they came of x special list. Some are great people who are perfectly qualified to do the job and others are only there because they filled a special slot. I would want to be viewed as the person who was qualified to be there and not as the person who filled the slot.

That's my two cents anyway for whatever its worth.


----------



## 263FPD

I have seen just us many men who had no business becoming cops, as I have women who were not cut out for the job. That said, I know many female officers who I want right beside me when the shit hits the fan. I do not believe in merits of PDs calling for a gender or a race specific lists. I would much rather see a PD going right down the list. 

As I have said, there are plenty of people out there that should never have made it past the Background process, in fortunately they sometimes do, and thus become a "gift that keeps on giving".


----------



## Guest

Delta784 said:


> Having female police officers provides definite advantages (searching female suspects, talking to rape victims, etc.), and while their ranks have grown over the last 20 years (see my "Women in Policing" thread), there still aren't a lot of females who want to be cops, so maybe it is necessary to actively go after them.


I am usually not in favor of any kind of preferential treatment based on race/gender/etc. However, I can definitely see the merits of wanting, and even needing, female leo's. My only hope would be that if a dept. thinks they NEED female officers (for reasons Delta listed) they should be held to equal standards as the men. Test scores, physical requirements, and all other standards for success should remain the same. Bad guys aren't going to cut them a break because they're a female, no one else should either.

Sent from my ADR6300


----------



## Guest

Exactly 

Sent from my Incredible 2 using Tapatalk


----------



## Guest

right.as.rain said:


> I am usually not in favor of any kind of preferential treatment based on race/gender/etc. However, I can definitely see the merits of wanting, and even needing, female leo's. My only hope would be that if a dept. thinks they NEED female officers (for reasons Delta listed) they should be held to equal standards as the men. Test scores, physical requirements, and all other standards for success should remain the same. Bad guys aren't going to cut them a break because they're a female, no one else should either.


The physical standards are different for men & women as far as body fat and PT scores, but that just acknowledges the genetic difference between males and females. At the risk of sounding like a Neanderthal, men are designed to be the warriors, while women are designed to be the mothers/caregivers, so women generally have a higher body fat percentage and less upper-body strength than men.

However, some things can be deceiving.....when I was in MP School, we had a platoon of females, and one day while we were doing pull-ups, the female drill sergeant for the female platoon had us do the "flexed arm hang", where you do a pull-up to the point your chin is even with the bar, and then stay there. For whatever reasons, the females could hold it for almost forever, and even our monster pull-up male could barely make 10 seconds.

Anyway, I judge cops, male or female, by their performance on the street, not their written test scores.


----------



## MC83

Delta784 - I was trying to send you a PM but it says your stored msgs/Inbox is full any you can't accept any new msgs. I was wondering, is there another way of contacting you? I apologize if there is on this site and I am just not aware of it yet. Thanks!


----------



## Guest

MC83 said:


> Delta784 - I was trying to send you a PM but it says your stored msgs/Inbox is full any you can't accept any new msgs. I was wondering, is there another way of contacting you? I apologize if there is on this site and I am just not aware of it yet. Thanks!


I just cleared out a bunch of PM's, should be good to go now.


----------



## DiMasi

HistoryHound said:


> I don't think anyone here would argue the appropriateness of veteran's preference. Anyone who has served the country, sacrificed time away from their family, friends and normal life, and been honorably discharged should get a bump to the top.


I disagree to an extent. A vet who scores a 70 should not be put above a civilian who scores 100. Not trying to piss people off with my second post but I just don't think it's fair. Veterans who get out of the service and choose LE as a sort of "consolation prize" employment (based solely on the fact that they get placed on top of every list and land a job easily) should be given credit, but *not outright preference* over Joe Citizen, who has been pursuing a career in LE his/her entire life and dedicated time and money into education and training for it.

5pts for Vet
10pts for DVet
>10pts for 402A/402B

And so the trolls don't think I'm a soldier hater - Semper Fi and all that shit.


----------



## SgtAndySipowicz

F23 said:


> Hey All I just Got my Results from the new list (96) and was wondering if anyone knows of a department looking for female recruits specifically.Thanks in advance for any positive info,Also I had listed Wellesley and Just discovered that they changed and are not a CS community anymore, so I will have to add another city/town and figured I would ask here for good suggestions.


This country has come a long way in regards to "equality" etc. Women and Men are now treated equally as far as the civil service test goes. If you (as a woman) score higher (or equal to, but are a better candidate) than another male/female then welcome aboard. If you are just shopping around looking for a* special preference *because of your sex I have no respect for you. That type of system (sex based preferences) is divisive and discriminatory towards males. Don't you want a job on *merit* versus getting it because of what sex organ you were born with? Same goes for "race based" hires. Best candidate should always get the job, not the best politically correct one.......


----------



## Guest

DiMasi said:


> I disagree to an extent. A vet who scores a 70 should not be put above a civilian who scores 100.


You would have to have borderline mental retardation to score a 70 on the civil service exam. In 24 years, I've never seen a veteran hired with a score less than the 90th percentile (90%-100%), so your argument is an invalid straw man, and most likely a case of sour grapes. For the record, I was hired with a 99% score and veteran's preference.

Man up and enlist, or study harder next time.


----------



## clancy-dawg

DiMasi said:


> DiMasi said:
> 
> 
> 
> And so the trolls don't think I'm a soldier hater - Semper Fi and all that shit.
> 
> 
> 
> Go fuck yourself.
Click to expand...


----------



## justanotherparatrooper

Im guessing , maybe hoping you were just being "flip" with that remark...now would be a REALLY good time to clarify it before half the board flames you as a troll.


----------



## Killjoy

> And so the trolls don't think I'm a soldier hater - Semper Fi and all that shit.


Real easy to say if you never risked anything more important than the deposit on your keg. The less than 1% of the population that sacrifice for, serve and defend this great country deserve every consideration over civilians who take no responsibility for maintaining this nation's security.


----------



## Guest

And so the trolls don't think I'm a soldier hater - Semper Fi and all that shit.

Yeah... that really set those trolls straight. Did you serve? I've always been of the mindset that if one hasn't served, then care should be taken when expressing opinions regarding veterans benefits. 

Sent from my Incredible 2 using Tapatalk


----------



## mpd61

In over twenty years two females were definately in my top four or five partners...
One went on to become a Madison Wisconsin Detective and the other is a damn good Patrol Sergeant here in Mass. I can see female only lists to get a tangible diversity on some departments. If they wash out due to background, Academy, or FTO/Probation then there's your equality...


----------



## 9319

Does DeMasi even know what Semper Fi means? Regardless, keep fist fucking yourself and DONT FORGET to file a suit with CS or a PD when you get passed over. That will always get you a job the next time around


----------



## Deuce

DiMasi said:


> I disagree to an extent. A vet who scores a 70 should not be put above a civilian who scores 100. Not trying to piss people off with my second post but I just don't think it's fair. Veterans who get out of the service and choose LE as a sort of "consolation prize" employment (based solely on the fact that they get placed on top of every list and land a job easily) should be given credit, but not outright preference over Joe Citizen, who has been pursuing a career in LE his/her entire life and dedicated time and money into education and training for it.
> 
> 5pts for Vet
> 10pts for DVet
> >10pts for 402A/402B
> 
> And so the trolls don't think I'm a soldier hater - Semper Fi and all that shit.


Spoken like a true pogue.. If you're even one of those... So Sal, what was your unit, where were ya stationed and what was your MOS?


----------



## kwflatbed

Back of the bus and to the bottom of the list for you








*BABY*


----------



## justanotherparatrooper

ooops! too late


----------



## Irishpride

mtc said:


> Some department just plain need women in the ranks.
> 
> What's wrong with that? They do the nasty searches of those nasty bitches you GUYS bring in all drunk and outrageous.
> 
> I wouldn't want to do THAT !!


We have Matrons on duty 24-7 so female prisoners always get searched. I have no use for race/gender based preferences . "Diversity" should always take a back seat to hiring the best candidate for the job. There is nothing about the CS test that gives males any type of advantage. If females/minority applicants can't score high enough to be considered they either need to study harder, enlist (and earn a legit and respectable preference) or find something else to do for a career.


----------



## Guest

Irishpride said:


> We have Matrons on duty 24-7 so female prisoners always get searched.


We have matrons on-call, but it takes them a minimum of a half-hour to get to the station, and that's assuming they were awake and available when the call came, and just had to put their uniform on and go. What about when the drug unit stops someone in the field and a female needs an extensive search for drugs? It's very convenient to just have a female officer go to the scene and do it.


----------



## DiMasi

Delta784 said:


> your argument is an invalid straw man, and most likely a case of sour grapes


1. Invalid argument? So you are saying a Vet with a score of 70 wouldn't get preference over a Civ with a score of 100? I must have understood the way the test is scored..

2. I'm on the job, so it's most likely not a case of sour grapes - but perhaps my personal feelings toward the scoring (as I stated in the original post).

You served our county, and you have my gratitude and respect. My post was not an attack against Vets - it was simply a personal opinion, but you can interpret it however you'd like. The fact that I did not sign my life away to the armed forces makes me no less of a man than you.


----------



## SgtAndySipowicz

Delta784 said:


> We have matrons on-call, but it takes them a minimum of a half-hour to get to the station, and that's assuming they were awake and available when the call came, and just had to put their uniform on and go. What about when the drug unit stops someone in the field and a *female* needs an extensive *search* for drugs? It's very convenient to just have a female officer go to the scene and do it.


I agree that it is nice to have a female officer on duty in this situation. But, if I was the guy that was bypassed by that same female (assuming she got preference based on gender, didn't score higher etc), I cannot imagine sitting on my couch, unemployed, saying how happy I am that the PD hired the lesser candidate (again, assuming they got gender preference, didn't score higher). I am all for female police officers, but only if they get hired under the SAME rules as men. Lowering standards to hire someone sends the wrong message........

PS: I recall that "female only" list you had mentioned. Shortly after those hires a normal "fair" list was used to hire 23 or 24 new hires (same year). All of the female hires, regardless of civil service score, have shift pick/dept seniority etc over all of those 23 or 24. The 23 or 24 included combat vets. So, on top of getting the job based on gender, they now have choice of shifts etc over all of the others. I don't think any of the females ever had to work a midnight shift etc. How is this fair?


----------



## LGriffin

F23,

Thankfully, those days are over. When I was hired, I was a part-time police officer and a police dispatcher with a college degree working toward my Master's Degree and a thick file of certifications but I had been passed over on the first round for a guy who self-sponsored full time and had less credentials. Sitting to pee will get you no preferential treatment on this job. 

If you want an edge over other applicants you must either self-sponsor or obtain experience through part-time work as a police officer and as a dispatcher. Start pounding the pavement and putting in your applications. If you're not in college, you may want to enroll. PI work will likely be a waste of your time.

I don't agree with reduced standards or preferential treatment of any kind and neither does the nutcase on an active domestic with Mommy issues or the recidivist fighting to get away from you. You should be spending your time building up your upper body strength and doing push ups until you puke. I'm sick of hearing about women who can't get over a little wall on a PT entrance exam and let me just clarify that i'm no monster at a size 2 petite. If I can get over a stockade fence and throw down a good fight anyone should, so PREPARE for the job and don't look for a hand out because no one will respect you for taking it and word gets around on this job.

Prepare, work hard and earn what you get.


----------



## 7costanza

All that by the age of 23, gold Jerry gold.


----------



## Guest

DiMasi said:


> 1. Invalid argument? So you are saying a Vet with a score of 70 wouldn't get preference over a Civ with a score of 100? I must have understood the way the test is scored..


Try reading for comprehension.....if someone scores a 70 on the civil service test, they most likely need help dressing and feeding themselves....they're not becoming cops. As I said previously, which you either didn't bother to read or apparently chose to ignore, is that I've never seen a veteran get on a police job with less than a 90th percentile score (90-100%). Your straw man veteran with a 70% that gets hired over a non-veteran 100% simply doesn't exist.



DiMasi said:


> 2. I'm on the job, so it's most likely not a case of sour grapes - but perhaps my personal feelings toward the scoring (as I stated in the original post).


What "job" are you on? First choice? Or did a veteran get that one before you?



DiMasi said:


> You served our county, and you have my gratitude and respect. My post was not an attack against Vets - it was simply a personal opinion, but you can interpret it however you'd like. The fact that I did not sign my life away to the armed forces makes me no less of a man than you.


You can take your "gratitude" and "respect" and shove them up your ass, because if you think you "sign your life away" when you join the armed forces, you know nothing about respect or honor. If you're actually "on the job", you're a disgrace to the badge.

---------- Post added at 14:28 ---------- Previous post was at 14:23 ----------



SgtAndySipowicz said:


> PS: I recall that "female only" list you had mentioned. Shortly after those hires a normal "fair" list was used to hire 23 or 24 new hires (same year). All of the female hires, regardless of civil service score, have shift pick/dept seniority etc over all of those 23 or 24. The 23 or 24 included combat vets. So, on top of getting the job based on gender, they now have choice of shifts etc over all of the others. I don't think any of the females ever had to work a midnight shift etc. How is this fair?


Guess again....they all had to work midnights with the exception of one, who was forced as junior officer into the then-new Community Police Unit, before people found out what a sham....uh, I mean good gig....it was, and now kill themselves to get into. All the rest did time on midnights, with one still being there, and another barely making first-halfs in the last shift bid.

BTW....do you hold the same animosity towards the male officers hired from the language-proficient (Chinese) list several years before the gender-specific list?


----------



## cousteau

LGriffin said:


> F23,
> 
> Thankfully, those days are over. When I was hired, I was a part-time police officer and a police dispatcher with a college degree working toward my Master's Degree and a thick file of certifications but I had been passed over on the first round for a guy who self-sponsored full time and had less credentials. Sitting to pee will get you no preferential treatment on this job.
> 
> If you want an edge over other applicants you must either self-sponsor or obtain experience through part-time work as a police officer and as a dispatcher. Start pounding the pavement and putting in your applications. If you're not in college, you may want to enroll. PI work will likely be a waste of your time.
> 
> I don't agree with reduced standards or preferential treatment of any kind and neither does the nutcase on an active domestic with Mommy issues or the recidivist fighting to get away from you. You should be spending your time building up your upper body strength and doing push ups until you puke. I'm sick of hearing about women who can't get over a little wall on a PT entrance exam and let me just clarify that i'm no monster at a size 2 petite. If I can get over a stockade fence and throw down a good fight anyone should, so PREPARE for the job and don't look for a hand out because no one will respect you for taking it and word gets around on this job.
> 
> Prepare, work hard and earn what you get.


I like your attitude, and I think you are right. There are some females on our job that do next to nothing, and know nobody will challenge them. There are guys like that too. Most people are all for hiring anyone qualified. Too many minority groups want preferential treatment. Thay want the same job with lower entrance qualifications i.e. test scoring or physical. I appreciate your common sense and intergrity.


----------



## Killjoy

DiMasi said:


> The fact that I did not sign my life away to the armed forces makes me no less of a man than you.


Keep telling yourself that....someday you may even believe it.


----------



## kwflatbed

Originally Posted by *DiMasi*  
The fact that I did not sign my life away to the armed forces makes me no less of a man than you.

From a combat veteran,I can see the yellow stripe from here !!!!!


----------



## LGriffin

DiMasi said:


> The fact that I did not sign my life away to the armed forces makes me no less of a man than you.


I wholeheartedly disagree. If not for Veterans, you wouldn't have the ability to express your opinion. 
Franky, one of the many reasons they deserve preference is that they are a shoe in for the academy. The academy and field training will be nothing compared to what they dealt with abroad and departments hate wasting money on candidates that wash out. So yes, they are far more desirable than you and I.


----------



## Guest

The fact that I did not sign my life away to the armed forces makes me no less of a man than you.

Yes it does. 
-Admiral Nelson 


Sent from my Incredible 2 using coke, limes, and rum.


----------



## Pvt. Cowboy

5-0 said:


> Sent from my Incredible 2 using coke, limes, and rum.


New technology?


----------



## Deuce

DiMasi said:


> The fact that I did not sign my life away to the armed forces makes me no less of a man than you.


As soon as one signs on the dotted line, one signs away everything up to and including their life. What line did you sign?


----------



## clancy-dawg

DiMasi said:


> ... fact that I did not sign my life away to the armed forces makes me no less of a man than you.


No, actually, it does.

I forget, did I tell you to go fuck yourself yet? Just in case, go fuck yourself.


----------



## DiMasi

Delta784 said:


> I've never seen a veteran get on a police job with less than a 90th percentile score (90-100%). Your straw man veteran with a 70% that gets hired over a non-veteran 100% simply doesn't exist.


"I've never seen it, therefore it does not exist." I could eat alphabet soup and shit a better argument than that.



Delta784 said:


> You can take your "gratitude" and "respect" and shove them up your ass.


I withdraw my previous statement. Consider it shoved.



clancy-dawg said:


> I forget, did I tell you to go fuck yourself yet? Just in case, go fuck yourself.


Every morning before bed.



Killjoy said:


> Keep telling yourself that....someday you may even believe it.


Enlisting does not inherently make you a good person. There are pieces of shit in the service just as there are in civilian life.

But I'm just a worthless leg anyway. It must have been my civilian superiority complex talking in my previous posts[/sarcasm]. I'll save my future opinions for less grunt-heavy forums.


----------



## Johnny Law

The rule of thumb for getting yourself out of a hole you just dug is to stop digging. Or not,... this is entertaining me.


----------



## Guest

DiMasi said:


> "I've never seen it, therefore it does not exist." I could eat alphabet soup and shit a better argument than that.


Show me someone....anyone, veteran or not, that got on a civil service department with a 70% test score, and I'll mail a crisp $100 bill to your place of work. Such a person doesn't exist, except in the minds of people who are bitter about veteran's preference.



DiMasi said:


> But I'm just a worthless leg anyway. It must have been my civilian superiority complex talking in my previous posts[/sarcasm]. I'll save my future opinions for less grunt-heavy forums.


I have a better idea; if you really are on the job, at the next choir practice, express your thoughts on veterans to your co-workers, especially the part about signing your life away. Then, have fun picking up your teeth from the floor.


----------



## kwflatbed

OK DiMasi it's time to put up or shut up, you say you are on the job
pm one of the mods or admin with your credentials.

Personaly I think you are 100% troll.


----------



## Irishpride

Delta784 said:


> Show me someone....anyone, veteran or not, that got on a civil service department with a 70% test score, and I'll mail a crisp $100 bill to your place of work. Such a person doesn't exist, except in the minds of people who are bitter about veteran's preference.


Delta,
There was in fact a classmate of mine in the academy who was a veteran and hired with a 71%. He was a mess in the academy and eventually resigned after a few years. I won't take your money but figured I'd let you know it has happened.


----------



## Guest

Irishpride said:


> Delta,
> There was in fact a classmate of mine in the academy who was a veteran and hired with a 71%. He was a mess in the academy and eventually resigned after a few years. I won't take your money but figured I'd let you know it has happened.


I need proof before I mail out money, but the offer is still good.


----------



## LGriffin

IBTL

This is going to be worse than the RTT thread.

Fire away, Men


----------



## OfficerObie59

Irishpride said:


> Delta,
> There was in fact a classmate of mine in the academy who was a veteran and hired with a 71%. He was a mess in the academy and eventually resigned after a few years. I won't take your money but figured I'd let you know it has happened.


Yeah, that guy was a soup sandwich.

"Oh I can't do PT, my gout is acting up again." Lay off the chirico.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SgtAndySipowicz

Delta784 said:


> Guess again....they all had to work midnights with the exception of one, who was forced as junior officer into the then-new Community Police Unit, before people found out what a sham....uh, I mean good gig....it was, and now kill themselves to get into. All the rest did time on midnights, with one still being there, and another barely making first-halfs in the last shift bid.
> 
> BTW....do you hold the same animosity towards the male officers hired from the language-proficient (Chinese) list several years before the gender-specific list?


We may be talking about 2 different gender hires (was there another one in the 90's?). The one I am talking about, 1 went to Traffic right away, not CP. *If* the others did midnights they were done with them by the time the next shift picks came around (when the 23-24 hires finished FTO etc). So *if *they did do mids (which I am still not sure of), they were done within a few months. The 1 currently on mids was not hired with that group, did not pass the PT test (hired several years later, passed the PT test, did not get back seniority. Currently is very low in seniority). And the other female on mids is a Vet who was hired "fairly" from the list, no gender preference (hired several years before list I am talking about, different set of hires). She does mids* by choice*.

I do not hold "animosity" towards the "gender hires" or the "language-proficient" officers on a personal level. They are all good and decent people. I do indeed have animosity as to *how *they were hired. It is not right to have a test, and then screw with the results to meet a quota. What's the point of having a *scored test *if you are going to give the job to someone who scored lower?


----------



## Guest

SgtAndySipowicz said:


> We may be talking about 2 different gender hires (was there another one in the 90's?). The one I am talking about, 1 went to Traffic right away, not CP. *If* the others did midnights they were done with them by the time the next shift picks came around (when the 23-24 hires finished FTO etc). So *if *they did do mids (which I am still not sure of), they were done within a few months. The 1 currently on mids was not hired with that group, did not pass the PT test (hired several years later, passed the PT test, did not get back seniority. Currently is very low in seniority). And the other female on mids is a Vet who was hired "fairly" from the list, no gender preference (hired several years before list I am talking about, different set of hires). She does mids* by choice*.


Speaking in code exhausts me....next time we see each other, we can straighten it out.



SgtAndySipowicz said:


> I do not hold "animosity" towards the "gender hires" or the "language-proficient" officers on a personal level. They are all good and decent people. I do indeed have animosity as to *how *they were hired. It is not right to have a test, and then screw with the results to meet a quota. What's the point of having a *scored test *if you are going to give the job to someone who scored lower?


You give the impression otherwise.....nothing displayed the culture of anti-female bias in our department more to me than when a female officer who was terminated got her job & seniority back. I was union president when it happened, and the number of people who bitched to me about her getting her seniority back were outnumbered only by the number of people who didn't have the balls to say it to my face, and bitched about it behind my back (which of course I heard about).

However, when a male officer who was terminated under identical circumstances got his job and seniority back, I heard nothing but high praise for standing up to the bully mayor and doing the right thing. There were almost no differences in the cases whatsoever, and whenever someone bitched to me about the female getting her seniority, I asked them why they didn't have a problem with the male getting his seniority.

That was the end of those conversations.

Disparity, anyone?


----------



## LGriffin

SgtAndySipowicz said:


> We may be talking about 2 different gender hires (was there another one in the 90's?). The one I am talking about, 1 went to Traffic right away, not CP. *If* the others did midnights they were done with them by the time the next shift picks came around (when the 23-24 hires finished FTO etc). So *if *they did do mids (which I am still not sure of), they were done within a few months. The 1 currently on mids was not hired with that group, did not pass the PT test (hired several years later, passed the PT test, did not get back seniority. Currently is very low in seniority). And the other female on mids is a Vet who was hired "fairly" from the list, no gender preference (hired several years before list I am talking about, different set of hires). She does mids* by choice*.
> 
> I do not hold "animosity" towards the "gender hires" or the "language-proficient" officers on a personal level. They are all good and decent people. I do indeed have animosity as to *how *they were hired. It is not right to have a test, and then screw with the results to meet a quota. What's the point of having a *scored test *if you are going to give the job to someone who scored lower?


I see where you're going with this and it underscores my point that the "quota" hires only make it harder for the rest of us that earned and do the job the right way. I was the first female to make it past probation on my department so you can imagine that it took some nasty arrests to be taken seriously. Fortunately, i'm a "dark cloud" (shit magnet) so it didn't take long.

The problem is that there are still so few females on the job that the spotlight is always on. I knew which ones were coming out of my academy and into a desk job


----------



## SgtAndySipowicz

Delta784 said:


> Speaking in code exhausts me....


LOL


----------



## LA Copper

I didn't know gender only lists still exist back there. "Way back when," when I was taking Mass Civil Service tests, I worked a security job. As on my first test, I scored 99 on the second test. A female that worked with me scored a 91 and lo and behold, she got hired and I didn't. 

I had gone to college, worked a security job where I caught felons, testified in court, went to school to get my EMT certification, learned the streets of my home town, learned what I could from the local officers I knew, etc, so I must admit, I wasn't too happy at the time that she got hired before me, nor did I think it was fair. 

However, as it turned out, after going to the local PD, she eventually went over to the Staties and is now a respected member of that department and has done very well for herself. Unfortunately, I never got hired back there but came out to Los Angeles where I think I've done pretty well for myself too.

Moral of the story is that it worked out for both of us and both of us are good at what we do, although I understand what Sgt Andy is saying. And yes, her and I still talk to each other.


----------



## Guest

My experience with female hiring was with a non-cs town. I was one of final 2 candidates. I was a full time campus PO with the sspo, reserve academy, and working part-time for municipality. She had dispatch experience. Chief had a daughter who was a full time PO, and the department had no female officers. I never had a chance. I was also raised in the town from Kindergarten on, and still have roots there. I believe she went on to hook up with... ah well... it doesn't matter anymore. I'm not bitter. Lol 

Sent from my Incredible 2 using Tapatalk


----------



## 263FPD

In my short 14 years, I have seen good officers get hired I have also seen disasters. Both good ones and disasters came in both genders. To my knowledge during my tenure, we have never based our hiring on gender specific lists. Language, yes. Gender, no. But let's face it, we need Spanish and Portuguese speakers. It is what it is.


----------



## Macop

Irishpride said:


> Delta,
> There was in fact a classmate of mine in the academy who was a veteran and hired with a 71%. He was a mess in the academy and eventually resigned after a few years. I won't take your money but figured I'd let you know it has happened.


I have a freind of mine, worked with him as an auxiliary back in the 90s. I was working f/t time on the Cape for a non-CS P.D and decided to make the jump to CS. We were both being hired by the same P.D, he did in fact get a 70 on the 2005 CS exam and was not a vetern or anything of that nature. He was hired, worked there for a few years and transfered to his hometown.

I will also say that gender specific hiring is ridiculous, at least here we have the same physical agility requirements. Other states that have coopers standards or a similar set up make it easier for females which is BS.


----------



## lofu

Since we are being honest, if someone can't get over that wall they might as well stay on the other side even if they are my back up because they will prob just be in the way anyway.

Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk


----------



## cmagryan

Just to add, there were more than a few male candidates stuck on the wrong side of the PAT wall as well .....


----------



## Macop

That isnt the point, were not looking to bash women. I can personally say that there are some women that id work with over some guys. Its not even about that, its the point that the standards should be the same across the board and its not. At least the slats on the wall are the only thing here, other states with the cooper standards type test are even worse violaters of grossly unequal physical standards for men and women, and age for that matter. Do the do or go find another line of work!


----------



## lofu

cmagryan said:


> Just to add, there were more than a few male candidates stuck on the wrong side of the PAT wall as well .....


Oh def. Please don't misunderstand my comments. If anyone, male or female can't pass the minimum standards they shouldnt be on this job. Find another line of work, don't lower the standards. There are females Id rather have with me when the shit hits the fan than some guys. I've always judged people on how they do the job and that I can trust will do whatever it takes to get all of us home to our families at the end of the shift.
Sent from my SPH-D700 using Tapatalk


----------



## Mozzarella

Good hygiene and a nice ass will also help. I know, useless comment.


----------



## mpd61

Fux dix boule-sheet topic. We sometimes seem to forget that most uneven wall...The political one.


----------

