Buffalo Fire Argues That Four Decades is Enough
In 1974, the US Department of Justice filed suit against the City of Buffalo alleging the fire department’s hiring process was discriminatory. What followed was nearly forty years of court mandated hiring quotas overseen by US District Court Judge John T. Curtin.
Now the city is seeking to end the court mandated hiring quotas and bring Judge Curtin’s role in overseeing the fire department hiring process to a close. In a motion filed by attorney Adam W. Perry, the city is asking the court to close the case. The motion referenced documented successes the city has had in increasing minority hiring over the years, including a process in 2013 that resulted in 73 blacks, 13 Hispanics and 30 women being among the top ranked candidates.
The Buffalo News quoted Perry as saying “This motion seeks to ultimately end the court’s supervision of the department.” He added “We anticipate that relief will be granted.”
They may have been among the top-ranked candidates, but were they hired?? This sounds like a version of “Okay, we’ve played the equality game for forty years, now go away and let us get back to business as usual.”
If you are implying “business as usual” is disparate treatment/intentional race discrimination, I’d say you are off base. If you are implying it is disparate impact (ie rigorous examination process that tends to exclude minority candidates), I’d say they likely have learned their lesson. Under the original ruling the court ordered a mandatory 1 for 1 hiring quota – one minority had to be hired for every white male hired. Now that they have a system that is capable of producing a list that does not show a disparate impact and the racial balance of the department is reflective of the applicant pool, the quota requirements are not necessary to ensure things do not get back to they way they had been.
There’s a big difference between being “among the top-ranked candidates” and actually being hired (you’ve posted many pieces about folks claiming less-qualified persons were hired over more-qualified minrity applicants). If the city HAS learned, and has a representative department, all the more power to them. But I’m old enough to remember the hypocritical, Serpico days of NYPD… “we’ve played by your rules for a while, now can we PLEASE go back to the old boys’ club rules?”
Andrew
I have yet to see a fire department where what you suggest is the case. I am being totally honest – and totally sincere. If there are cases here in Fire Law where less qualified white males are being selected over more qualified minority applicants – I’ll claim a case of early Alzheimer’s…. I do not recall them. What is all too common are FDs (chiefs and administrations) believing they are doing the right thing – using selection processes that have a disparate impact on minority applicants, and then not addressing the resulting disparity. That is a long long way from saying that less qualified whites are being hired/more qualified minorities being passed over. It does go to whether the selection criteria are valid (ie. does a firefighter have to be able to read at an 8th grade level, solve routine math problems, reason out certain concepts) – but there is no implication that folks who are more qualified are being passed over. What does the future of a quota-less Buffalo FD hold? I don’t think it is fair to imply that Serpico-era corruption will naturally follow. At least they have figured out a selection process that does not exclude otherwise qualified minority candidates.
I can’t remember the name right now, but the one I was thinking of primarily was a black fire investigator who was passed over for less qualified whites. As I recall, the investigator had — in addition to all the regular stuff like FF I and II, Officer I and II, Investigator, etc — a JD and was also a doctor of chiropractic (neither of which have to do with firefighting, obviously, but those stuck in my mind along with all his FD credentials).
The failure to promote and even the harassment of employees once they are hired are different types of cases that raise additional issues. You are correct that we do see quite a bit of intolerable nonsense going on in those types of cases but they are not the type to get 40 years of judicial oversight like we see in the hiring cases. In the hiring cases – its not about the employee’s personality or attitude playing a role in what occurs – it is where the organization makes a decision on hiring criteria that impacts the ability of minority candidates to make it to the final candidate pool. I have not seen one where there is purposeful discrimination (although the trial judge in the FDNY case made that argument) – it is what we call disparate impact discrimination – where neutral appearing criteria and tests have a disproportionate affect on minorities.
Okay, that makes sense. Maybe I still have too much of the “Age of Aquarius” idealism, but I think folks should be treated fairly before and after hire.
No argument from me – just so it is equal for all… not just some…