# Walpole hires only females



## Mikey682 (May 2, 2002)

Walpole cops set record: Town now has three female police officers on the force
By Anna Orlando / News Staff Writer
Wednesday, February 18, 2004

WALPOLE -- Selectmen hired two female police officers, bringing the total number of female cops in town to three -- the most the department has ever had.
"I think it's good that they hired more women, absolutely," said Walpole resident Karen Lichtenstein. "I don't know if the ratio (of male to female officers) matters, but if crimes occur against women, I would think women would be more comfortable talking to other women."
Selectmen have hired Maria Gonzalez, a former Taunton cop who was recently laid off, and Dorothy Mucciarone, Walpole's current part-time dispatcher.
Jackie Nay has been the only female officer in Walpole since she graduated from the police academy about eight months ago.
"Prior to her (Nay) being hired, it has been a number of years that we had a female (officer) and it was a void we felt we had to fill," Lt. Scott Bushway said. "We felt one (female officer) was not representative of our goals. We felt it was time to seek approval from the Board of Selectmen and the civil service to hire not one, but two, additional females."
"If the girls can do the job then I think hiring policewomen is just fine," Walpole resident Susan Pelletirer said. "I'm sure they're just as qualified."
The two newest cops in town have excellent qualifications, according to selectmen. *They did not interview any other candidates.*
Gonzalez, a Taunton resident, graduated from the police academy in March 1996. She has also been an officer in East Boston and Jamaica Plain.
"When I was in East Boston I worked every shift, did drug arrests, you name it, I did it," Gonzalez told selectmen during her interview.
Gonzalez transferred from East Boston to Jamaica Plain to be closer to her three sons, but then moved to Taunton to move her children out of the Boston school system, she said.
In Jamaica Plain, Gonzalez, who is fluent in Spanish, was the community police officer.
"I would go into businesses in town and everyone knew me by my first name," she told selectmen. "I like dealing with people; it's refreshing."
Gonzalez is working toward her master's degree in criminology at Boston University and plans to graduate in May.
Mucciarone has an associate's degree in criminology from Bunker Hill Community College and is a full-time dispatcher for the Massachusetts State Police in addition to being Walpole's part-time dispatcher.
"I love being a dispatcher, but I feel I am ready to take a more active role in criminal justice," Mucciarone told selectmen during her interview. She also told selectmen she worked as a park ranger and has attended a park ranger academy.
Mucciarone will have to graduate from the police academy before she begins work as a Walpole policewoman. Gonzalez is scheduled to begin work later this month.

---------------------------------------------------
No offense to the women on this board, but this pisses the hell out of me that my hometown, the town i wanted to work for, a civil service agency, can go ahead and hire who ever they want, and get around civil service rules. I dont question their qualificatios, but when the selectmen appoint people who's most paramount reason for hiring was the fact that they pee sitting down only furthers the never ending frustration with mass police hiring politics. :sb: 
Interview 2, hire 2.....I love it!!!!!!! :evil:


----------



## evidence (Jul 24, 2002)

Thats too bad. I have a buddy who is very high on the list in Walpole and was really looking forward to getting in the hiring process there. Looks like he'll have to wait a couple more years.


----------



## DODK911 (May 21, 2003)

An Officer that I work with is #1 on there list and never received a card or anything.


----------



## 2-Delta (Aug 13, 2003)

No comment :roll:


----------



## CampusOfficer (Dec 29, 2002)

DODK911 said:


> An Officer that I work with is #1 on there list and never received a card or anything.


I am no civil service expert by any stretch of the imagination but.....if your friend is #1 on their list, and never recieved a card, I think he has a beef. The dispute would only arise because of the dispatcher being hired though, because the other female was from the laid off list. I realize that they can/will hire who they want (political game). Any civil service experts have any comments.


----------



## tomahawk (May 1, 2002)

I believe a town can ask for a "special qualifications" Civil Service list. I have heard of EMT-only, female-only, Spanish speaking-only, and sign-language qualified as examples of this.

Walpole probably took the laid off TPD officer (totally legit) and requested a "female-only" list for one candidate (which would generate a card for the top three women on the list). The other two women either did not sign or were otherwise eliminated before the interview process.

It sucks, but it is playing by the rules according to HRD.

-Mike


----------



## tomahawk (May 1, 2002)

To confirm what I said above, here is a link to the form that an agency must submit to get a list of candidates:

http://www.state.ma.us/hrd/employment/EM_Civil_Service/EM_Civil_Service_Forms/EM_CS_Form13.doc

There is a section where the appointing authority can specify gender, EMT, or bilingual restrictions on the list.

-Mike


----------



## mpd61 (Aug 7, 2002)

Just to expand on what Tommy-hawker said;

A town can utilize the "females" list when their ranks have less than 10% females. Since they only had one, I'm sure it was not a problem!

P.S. Even then they can still use loopholes to get to a female on the list if they want to. 
:wink:


----------



## Fubu1383 (Feb 28, 2003)

Hey no sweat Mikey...theres always surgery that can fix that :naughty:


----------



## badogg88 (Dec 17, 2003)

I'm a female, and even I get mad about stuff like that. I would like to think that I get hired because I can fulfill the job, not because I'm a female and they need to fill a quota. However, this may sound hypocritical, but if I get offered a job, I'm going to take it. Especially in a state like Massachusetts where it is so difficult to get said job. 

It's a Catch-22 situation, not an easy one either. I think a lot of females are on the line of the decision because they may feel they only got the job because of their gender, but they want to be a police officer and take the job.

That's just my :2c:.


----------



## Mikey682 (May 2, 2002)

I was glad to see a laid off officer get on, and I have met this other one that works as a dispatcher, and she seems like a good candidate. If I was offered a job because of something I didnt work to achieve, I would be wondering what kind of reception I'd get from fellow candidates still sitting on a list. 
2 interviewed though? WTF. Oh well time to face facts and realize in Massachusetts, candidates are not chosent paramountly for thier qualifications, and civil service authorizes reverse-discrimination. 

Bottom like, Civil Service Sucks!
:letitall:


----------



## Southside (Sep 4, 2003)

"I think it's good that they hired more women, absolutely," said Walpole resident Karen Lichtenstein

NO S&amp;^T you think its good......maybe because you are a WOMAN! I think women cops are great, but if you want to be treated no different then the men.....then get in line.....none of this bypassing number one crap on the list to get to a woman!!!!


----------



## PearlOnyx (Jun 28, 2002)

Call MCAD and tell them that you were discriminated against based on sex for hiring for a state position. Hiring based on sex, race, or anything else, other than being the best man/woman/alien for the job is government condoned discrimination in my mind. It's too bad that stuff like this can still happen. If they went down the list and this woman still got hired, then good for her. She was the best person for the job, but how do you know who is and who isn't, when the town picks and chooses who they want to hire without giving opportunity to others.


----------



## mgb (Nov 9, 2003)

I was #1 on the civil service list for my home town of Dedham for 4 years. Vietnam Era Veteran, Resident, Top scorer w/o the vetpoints. There was a MCAD lawsuit against the town, because the Police, Fire &amp; Public Works Depts. were all white male. I never got hired  , they skipped over me and others to hire three minorities (2 were women). Things worked out eventually, I've worked on the old Capitol PD, Norwood PD and Now the MSP, Good things eventually come to those who wait.


----------



## MVS (Jul 2, 2003)

Due to personal connections I will limit my :2c: 

Yes both candidates were qualified. The hiring was totally legit by HRD rules. 

My opinions will be kept to myself.... even though as a Male, I do agree with this hiring. 

Perhaps civil circus should get rid of the "Females-only", "EMT-only", "Vet-only" lists. It goes back to the VETS preference debate.... It's ok to skip other people with a high score in favor for a Vet, but it's not OK to skip others for a woman? I see it as discrimination either way. You discriminate for females and you're discriminating against non-vets as well. I'm ok with the EMT requirement though (I'm not an EMT) as it is more relavent to the job.


----------



## PBC FL Cop (Oct 22, 2003)

RPD931 said:


> Perhaps civil circus should get rid of the "Females-only", "EMT-only", "Vet-only" lists. It goes back to the VETS preference debate.... It's ok to skip other people with a high score in favor for a Vet, but it's not OK to skip others for a woman? I see it as discrimination either way. You discriminate for females and you're discriminating against non-vets as well. I'm ok with the EMT requirement though (I'm not an EMT) as it is more relavent to the job.


The only difference in the discrimination factor I see with this statement is that Vets have earned their status, as opposed to women or minorities, whose only reason for rating a higher consideration was that fact that they born.


----------



## MVS (Jul 2, 2003)

I respect the VETS. But I don't see how someone's decision to join the military and serve time for VET status makes them better than me or any other non-vet.

They (VETS) freely decided to serve in the Armed Forces, since there hasn't been any recent drafts. Though they serve proudly, and they should be proud, I don't see how they are better than me. NO ONE forced them to join the military. Like some other folks stated before, if they (I) could have afforded it or for other reasons in their personal life, could have, they would have joined the military.

We are ALL created equal and should be treated as such. In the civil service method, we should all be ranked as such... not because one is a vet, minority or a female, but by score.

There are tons of VETS on the list that would probably fall past the rank of 100 based on just test score, but because of their VET pref. they zoom to the top. C'mon, we all know some VETS that are dumb as bricks too... all they have to do is PASS the test and zoom up the list. Is that fair? Example: on a small town list there maybe be just one Resident/VET, he may only have scored an 80...but ZOOM!! right over the Resident that scored a 98 because he's a VET.

I'm willing to compromise, give the VET a "couple" extra points, but not preference. There was a female in this thread earlier (Badogg88) and she stated:


> I would like to think that I get hired because I can fulfill the job, not because I'm a female and they need to fill a quota.


 VETS should feel the same way... Getting preferential treatment is lame. Anyone else agree?

Oh boy... :shock: .... This should spark something


----------



## Southside (Sep 4, 2003)

RPD,

Well said! I agree with you 100% Nothing wrong with giving Vets 2 extra points.....some have earned it, but full pref....NO WAY!


----------



## phuzz01 (May 1, 2002)

As yet another dead horse steps up to the beating block... :roll:


----------



## Mitpo62 (Jan 13, 2004)

I have to chime in on this one. I too served willingly in the AF for 5+ years, during peacetime, in the early 80's. I took the exam in '99 and scored 100. I have many years of experience, academy trained, etc. Yet folks can play the system, go in the Army for two years and peel potatos in Missouri and go ahead of me and others with similar experience(s). WHAT A CROCK! That's why kids coming out of high school are told if you want to be a fireman/policeman go in the service and do your time. With the current situation in the Middle East the "preference" will never end.


----------



## mpd61 (Aug 7, 2002)

Mitpo62 said:


> I have to chime in on this one. I too served willingly in the AF for 5+ years, during peacetime, in the early 80's. I took the exam in '99 and scored 100. I have many years of experience, academy trained, etc. Yet folks can play the system, go in the Army for two years and peel potatos in Missouri and go ahead of me and others with similar experience(s). WHAT A CROCK! That's why kids coming out of high school are told if you want to be a fireman/policeman go in the service and do your time. With the current situation in the Middle East the "preference" will never end.


As stated earlier, Most of us agree with the MSP model. Two (2) points for vets.

Also Agree with above, the open period since 1991 is quite unfair to many out here. Many served 5-10 years active duty between April 10, 1975 (Vietnam Era) and Desert storm in 1991. Many of you were around for Beirut, Grenada, and Panama but get squat from our Commonwealth.
Now twenty years later, serve active duty for 180 and get your ticket punched!
:shock:

Only personnel IN-THEATRE should get ribbon/medal etc. That goes for Active or reserve/guard.

BTW- Females list should be utilized when there is a legitimate need to 
have gender represented (such as No females on roster) 
8)


----------



## 40th MPOC#309 (Aug 7, 2002)

Y'know Scott-you'll always be a REAL Vet in me &amp; Mackenzies heart..... :lol:


----------



## mgb (Nov 9, 2003)

RE: to my last post. I was #1 even without the Vet points and still didn't get picked! I was the wrong sex &amp; race. Reverse Discrimination :?: I guess I was the one who had to pay for the sins of the past.  One good thing about what happened is I can now retire in 7 years @ 55yoa verses 62 if I stayed with Norwood PD. If you really want a job in law enforcement for a certain police department/agency, keep plugging away. I was 30 before I finally got picked!


----------



## mpd61 (Aug 7, 2002)

40th MPOC#309 said:


> Y'know Scott-you'll always be a REAL Vet in me & Mackenzies heart..... :lol:


Bum-kissing will get you far with me, you old municipal-dawg! 
:wink:


----------



## PearlOnyx (Jun 28, 2002)

As for the Vetrans preferance versus sex preferance issue. I feel that Vetrans have served their country, and for that reasons have done something to deserve some sort of preferance from the state. On the other hand, I feel that women, minorities, and other protected groups, have done nothing more or less than I, as a white male have done to deserve this job. Accepting preference, although understandable, is lame. By accepting preference without showing some sort of advantage over another candidate or giving some sort of speicial service to the state, is basically saying that you are in need of additional points or preferance, only because of who you are. I think women, minorities, and other groups are all my equals, and for that reason, deserve equal preferance: Zero.
On the vetrans issue, I think it is a bit overrun. I would like to see the two point system, over the complete preferance system. Further, I would like to see this preferance restricted to those who served a signifianct period of active duty service during a time of declared armed conflict. This open period stuff, where people are getting preference during non-war times, without serving in some sort of overseas campaign (Bosnia, Kosovo etc.), is a bit excessive. I believe vetrans deserve preference over the previously mentioned protected groups, because they have given back something to their country, where as these protected groups have done nothing special to reward them with any sort of preferance.


----------



## 40th MPOC#309 (Aug 7, 2002)

Seconded.


----------



## DODK911 (May 21, 2003)

PEARLONYX, I agree with you, Vets should get something for serving there country wheather it be points or preferance. As for you non vets complaining that most of these vets chose to serve this country they werent drafted, well if it wasnt for these men and women volunteering to fight for this country to keep it free and safe, you and I would be here to complain about this points or preferance crap. Next time you want to complain about your veterans getting preferance, think about OUR men and women over seas right now fighting for your safety, there not home with there wives and children in a warm bed. So your right our VETS deserve something.


----------



## SRRerg (Sep 19, 2003)

If your joining the service for a few points, you're joining for all of the wrong reasons. I agree the two point system is fairest. The vets preference would work better if it required a campaign ribbon, but even that can be inflated (I believe they continued to award the Southwest Asia Service medal throughout the 90's, long after the first gulf war.) 

I was hired from a veteran's list by the T, and I was behind all of the disabled veterans. Although most had training or service related injuries (Gulf War Syndrome, several knee injuries, etc,) Several of them had disabilities that were hardly service related: off-duty MVA's and such. There is a HUGE difference between wrecking your Humvee in an Iraqi foxhole and your POV hitting a telephone pole racing to get home on a 96. Unfortunately, Civil Service makes no such distinction.

Quick edit...
DODK9, brought up a great point, when the 77th does finally start, there will be a few people in that class because people ahead of them on the list are overseas....


----------



## PearlOnyx (Jun 28, 2002)

I never understood how we could give disabled vertrans preference on a police exam. These people, being partially disabled by definition, how could they possibly be fit for duty as a police officer? Maybe I am missing something, and this really makes sense, but I don't know.
Although most people today, weren't drafted into millitary service, volunteering for service is still something very admirable and necessary. If people chose not to volunteer for service, we would not have this freedom of speech to complain about preference or anything of the sort.


----------



## Guest (Feb 21, 2004)

mpd61 said:


> 40th MPOC#309 said:
> 
> 
> > Y'know Scott-you'll always be a REAL Vet in me & Mackenzies heart..... :lol:
> ...


You "boys" should get room and then call LOMAC!
:evil:


----------



## 40th MPOC#309 (Aug 7, 2002)

Whoa Dude-back off........ :shock:


----------



## Guest (Feb 21, 2004)

40th MPOC#309 said:


> Whoa Dude-back off........ :shock:


Maybe you can back off out of MPD61 first!
:lol:


----------

