NY Woman to Become Fire Fighter Without Passing Physical Exam

[sageoftruth]

I thought this seemed too ridiculous to be true. It mostly is true, but apparently the test requirements have been lowered not just for her but also for all future applicants. Of course, I don't know how I feel about lowering the standards for the test. Apparently they had previously required you to pass the physical test, but now it comes down to what your average is between the physical and the academic tests. Because she excelled academically, she passed in the new system. It still sounds a bit questionable, given how physically demanding firefighting is.

Maybe the physical test just was a bit arbitrary to begin with? Why does the psychical requirement have a time limit of 18 minutes, and not 17 or 16? If we are so concerned about the physical element here, why aren't we demanding the test be even more stringent, and people have to pass it in 10 minutes? The examiners are probably the best equipped people to make that decision.

If the examiners have lowered the requirements for entry, that would be an acknowledgement on their part that the test didn't need to be that hard to produce capable fire fighters. In which case, her not passing the physical isn't as big a deal as people suggested. I remember a few years back when people were complaining about a firefighter paper exam being simplified to enable people with poor reading/writing skills from getting fire fighter jobs. It never occurred to the people complaining that perhaps the examiners who changed the exam requirements actually thought things through before making changes; that they might have realized the examination was pointlessly baring entry to what were perfectly good firefighters. Exams by their very nature are kind of an abstract measure of a person's ability, and they are not 100% accurate an indicator, otherwise no exam would ever need be changed.

Good point. Making a test too hard can have disastrous effects. I recall reading somewhere that a certain country had a drivers test that was so hard, that most people just said, "Screw it" and decided to drive without taking the test. Lots of horrible driving ensued. Still, I should also note that there was more to it than just the test being hard. It was also a huge bureaucratic mess.

 

[Kameburger]

I just have to ask since no one has seemed to disagree with this, but what is the argument in favor of this? Like the genuine argument. I understand the desire for diversity, but it does seem like no one thinks this was a good idea. And the only kind of regret/reflection I've seen on that matter is one person on this board who lamented the fact that feminists are going to essentially get a lot of shit for this.

 

[alj]

That is a bit crazy. I mean irrespective of your sex you should have to meet the minimum physical requirements of the job in question.

This issue here is that they where probably terrified of being called sexist so they let her pass, even if the lady in question would more than likely not claimed that.

We have had a similar problem in the UK with children as young as 14 being sexually abused by gangs of men in a town called Rochdale, and the police and social services downplayed the issue as the men in question happened to be of asian origin as they did not want to be called racist.

This kind of political bullshit is going too far, its causing problems all over.


EDIT. On a separate note, do you have to pay the fire service in the US before they will rescue you or is if free ? Socialised fire service! Oh no the commies are coming !

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I am a petite female, as a child I wanted to grow up to be a firefighter. However, when I was 19 and went to apply, I was told I simply did not weigh enough to be considered. They told me I was too small. I understood, and chose to go into lifeguard training at the time instead since there were no weight requirements at the time. As an Ocean rescue lifeguard, I had much more required of me than a regular lifeguard, and while it was extremely difficult to do, I was able to meet the requirements, including being able to rescue a person much larger than myself. I would not want them to reduce the requirements, as it could mean life and death for someone in the event you need to rescue them and are unable to do so.

One thing I would like to note on that however, is different techniques should be allowed if it accomplishes the goal. A female may not be able to lift a person the same way their male counterpart can but be able to accomplish the same goal with a different method. They should be allowed to use whatever technique they require to be able to meet the same goal. IF the goal is to get a person from point A to point B unharmed,they should be able to use their own methods to do so as long as it accomplishes the same objective, rather than be required to have everyone use the same method.

@ Alj- Yes, you have to pay for Fire services via local taxes, and if you are not in their coverage area you have to opt in to pay more for it as well.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/12/07/9272989-firefighters-let-home-burn-over-75-fee-again

 

[Ihateregistering1]

EDIT. On a separate note, do you have to pay the fire service in the US before they will rescue you or is if free ? Socialised fire service! Oh no the commies are coming !

Nothing is free, you pay for them with taxes, they are what's called (in economics) a "public good", which is essentially something that everyone gets an equal amount of regardless of how much you pay in taxes (ideally). It's the same thing with the Military, or the Police: it doesn't matter if you pay $1 in taxes a year or $1,000,000, the police will still show up if you call them, or the Military will still defend you if someone invades.

 

[DrOswald]

I've heard Copout to be a shitty movie, but it at least provided us with this wonderfully useful clip:


Fuck. This. Shit. If this is the way the world is heading, it's time to burn Tumblr to the ground and never let its echo chamber of mouth-frothing lunatics rise again. Seriously, this is fucking appalling. No amount of whining about sexism, white privilege or whatever is the buzzword of the day is, is going to fix the fact that we now can graduate people who are by definition unfit to do their job.

As if this wasn't enough, just moments ago I saw this article [http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/world-news/man-68-faces-rape-charges-after-posing-as-model-for-fifty-shades-of-grey-dates-31198049.html] about a 68-year old man who'd coaxed women into Fifty Shades of Grey -inspired sex while posing as a dashing model, with total consent from his partners. He is now faced with multiple charges of rape because oh no, the impossibly gorgeous model who promised to be the knight of your dreams didn't actually turn out to be that. The guy's a scumbag, definitely, but a rapist? Fuck off, if the women had kept the blindfold on all the time, I bet they would have been perfectly happy.

You know why he is being charged with rape? Because he raped them! Strange that.

 

[AzrealMaximillion]

Maybe she'll pass out running into a burning building and realize that being a firefighter isn't fun and games.

 

[DrOswald]

So, having actually read the article, it sounds like this woman is woefully unqualified in terms of the physical demands of the job. Not only did she complete the test more than 4 minutes over time (more than 20% over time), it was in fact her best attempt by far. Every other time she took it ("many" times, according to the articles) she failed to even complete the test.

In a generalist organization (which is how firefighting works, as I understand it) excellence in one area cannot makeup for failures in another.

 

[Gretha Unterberg]

Then what is the exam for?

Excelent point.

But sometimes, not often; but sometimes there is an lazy approach with exames.
Even if you have jobs where subject has no effect on peoples performance at this job,
like itness tests for deskjobs or as drivers.
You just test everyone becaue there are enough people applying anyway
and you are slightly more flexible if your employee are qualified for more then one position.

 

[TallanKhan]

No one should ever be given a free pass for the sake of diversity. Don't get me wrong, I am all for diversity, but if they want women in the NYFD so badly then they need to set about recruiting women who can do the job rather than letting in ones who can't for the sake of a quota.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I am a petite female, as a child I wanted to grow up to be a firefighter. However, when I was 19 and went to apply, I was told I simply did not weigh enough to be considered. They told me I was too small. I understood, and chose to go into lifeguard training at the time instead since there were no weight requirements at the time. As an Ocean rescue lifeguard, I had much more required of me than a regular lifeguard, and while it was extremely difficult to do, I was able to meet the requirements, including being able to rescue a person much larger than myself. I would not want them to reduce the requirements, as it could mean life and death for someone in the event you need to rescue them and are unable to do so.

One thing I would like to note on that however, is different techniques should be allowed if it accomplishes the goal. A female may not be able to lift a person the same way their male counterpart can but be able to accomplish the same goal with a different method. They should be allowed to use whatever technique they require to be able to meet the same goal. IF the goal is to get a person from point A to point B unharmed,they should be able to use their own methods to do so as long as it accomplishes the same objective, rather than be required to have everyone use the same method.

@ Alj- Yes, you have to pay for Fire services via local taxes, and if you are not in their coverage area you have to opt in to pay more for it as well.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/12/07/9272989-firefighters-let-home-burn-over-75-fee-again

Except how many different ways do you think you could transport someone during a fire? You're either dragging someone or picking them up. Both require you to be fit as fuck (especially picking someone up whilst being loaded with heavy gear). The Army gets you to drag, carry, assist, etc. Not to mention a lot of the methods that are required are for safety reasons as well, not so much for the victim but for the person carrying them.

There are multiple ways to 1) drag someone and 2 ) to pick them up. There are multiple ways to put them on your back and carry them in front. The problem with some of the tests is they only allow people to use specific methods that may not work for others. A while back I had watched videos comparing how the Firefighters in Asian Nations did things vs the US firefighters and the techniques were equally effective but different. I think some of the requirements in the US in regards to how the test is done not only may unnecessarily exclude women due to not allowing multiple techniques, but also exclude men of smaller stature as well. These same people would more than pass the required tests in other nations.

EDIT: I should make it clear however, there is no way to know if this woman would be capable of using the other techniques unless tested and should still be forced to pass the requirements before being a firefighter.

 

[mad825]

I think some of the requirements in the US in regards to how the test is done not only may unnecessarily exclude women due to not allowing multiple techniques, but also exclude men of smaller stature as well. These same people would more than pass the required tests in other nations.

....It's a selection process based on physical prowess. The whole point is to be vigorous. Each nation have their own standards which also goes for the same with paramedics, police and military. There are just some people who can't pass the physical and that's just a state of fact not prejudice.

Depending on how much you were underweight it might have been a non-issue. most guys that I've talked to some people who have failed under that problem in the army and they were just recommended to go to McDonalds and drink protein shakes.

 

[Mong0]

Political correctness is actually potentially destroying society, it seems.

 

[hentropy]

Keep in mind that a lot of these physical exams, whether it's for a fire department or a box-carrying job, typically have little to do with the actual demands of the job. Keep in mind I'm not making any such assertion with this case, I know next to nothing about the fire department physical exam for FDNY. It could be perfectly representative of the job demands, in which case this would not be okay. It's not okay either way, really.

However, these types of exams usually conform to some sort of average of people they want to accept any given year. If they see that less people are passing the physical exams, then they will naturally lower the standards, even if it's for the year. They still need workers after all, and there's both a ceiling and a floor for the number of people they let in. And naturally, they want the best-conditioned people they can get without excluding people.

So one still needs to take a look at the test and decide whether or not it is truly representative of the work that will need to be done, or just a way of ranking prospects' physical capabilities with no real regard to occupational relevancy.

All of that being said, it's not exactly ideal. Countless women are trying to prove that they can do these things without special treatment, and it is a bit of a slap in the face to them. The fact is that girls aren't exactly taught that being a firefighter or soldier or anything in that ballpark is really available to them as a career choice, so as a result there is no surprise when there's barely any women trying out, let alone actually making it. That is the problem that needs to be addressed, not just trying to reconfigure exam standards.

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I am a petite female, as a child I wanted to grow up to be a firefighter. However, when I was 19 and went to apply, I was told I simply did not weigh enough to be considered. They told me I was too small. I understood, and chose to go into lifeguard training at the time instead since there were no weight requirements at the time. As an Ocean rescue lifeguard, I had much more required of me than a regular lifeguard, and while it was extremely difficult to do, I was able to meet the requirements, including being able to rescue a person much larger than myself. I would not want them to reduce the requirements, as it could mean life and death for someone in the event you need to rescue them and are unable to do so.

One thing I would like to note on that however, is different techniques should be allowed if it accomplishes the goal. A female may not be able to lift a person the same way their male counterpart can but be able to accomplish the same goal with a different method. They should be allowed to use whatever technique they require to be able to meet the same goal. IF the goal is to get a person from point A to point B unharmed,they should be able to use their own methods to do so as long as it accomplishes the same objective, rather than be required to have everyone use the same method.

@ Alj- Yes, you have to pay for Fire services via local taxes, and if you are not in their coverage area you have to opt in to pay more for it as well.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2011/12/07/9272989-firefighters-let-home-burn-over-75-fee-again

Except how many different ways do you think you could transport someone during a fire? You're either dragging someone or picking them up. Both require you to be fit as fuck (especially picking someone up whilst being loaded with heavy gear). The Army gets you to drag, carry, assist, etc. Not to mention a lot of the methods that are required are for safety reasons as well, not so much for the victim but for the person carrying them.

There are multiple ways to 1) drag someone and 2 ) to pick them up. There are multiple ways to put them on your back and carry them in front. The problem with some of the tests is they only allow people to use specific methods that may not work for others. A while back I had watched videos comparing how the Firefighters in Asian Nations did things vs the US firefighters and the techniques were equally effective but different. I think some of the requirements in the US in regards to how the test is done not only may unnecessarily exclude women due to not allowing multiple techniques, but also exclude men of smaller stature as well. These same people would more than pass the required tests in other nations.

EDIT: I should make it clear however, there is no way to know if this woman would be capable of using the other techniques unless tested and should still be forced to pass the requirements before being a firefighter.

That's kinda the whole point of having a set standard. It won't matter if you can do the same task with less effort, you need to meet the standards that require the most effort in order to show you're physically capable as everyone else.

Keep in mind that a lot of these physical exams, whether it's for a fire department or a box-carrying job, typically have little to do with the actual demands of the job. Keep in mind I'm not making any such assertion with this case, I know next to nothing about the fire department physical exam for FDNY. It could be perfectly representative of the job demands, in which case this would not be okay. It's not okay either way, really.

However, these types of exams usually conform to some sort of average of people they want to accept any given year. If they see that less people are passing the physical exams, then they will naturally lower the standards, even if it's for the year. They still need workers after all, and there's both a ceiling and a floor for the number of people they let in. And naturally, they want the best-conditioned people they can get without excluding people.

So one still needs to take a look at the test and decide whether or not it is truly representative of the work that will need to be done, or just a way of ranking prospects' physical capabilities with no real regard to occupational relevancy.

All of that being said, it's not exactly ideal. Countless women are trying to prove that they can do these things without special treatment, and it is a bit of a slap in the face to them. The fact is that girls aren't exactly taught that being a firefighter or soldier or anything in that ballpark is really available to them as a career choice, so as a result there is no surprise when there's barely any women trying out, let alone actually making it. That is the problem that needs to be addressed, not just trying to reconfigure exam standards.

I don't buy the whole "girls aren't taught they can be a soldier, firefighter, whatever". While I've never been to a Fire Station House. I've been to Army Barracks, Police Stations and Naval Bases. There are plenty of women in all of those roles. I've dealt with more female cops than I have males cop too. In this day and age if women aren't aware of the jobs available (which isn't exactly hard to do either. Hop on the respective branches websites and look at recruiting details) then that's just ignorance on their behalf. In a society where the easiest way to find something out is to Google it, they have no excuse.

Of course we should have a set standard, and sometime that standard becomes outdated and new techniques should be implemented as well I think we can learn quite a bit in the US by watching how other nations do things and adapt some of their techniques. If someone is capable of being a firefighter in another nation that also has set standards, wouldn't it be silly to deny them to be one here especially when these guys are bad asses..

 

[Lil devils x_v1legacy]

I think some of the requirements in the US in regards to how the test is done not only may unnecessarily exclude women due to not allowing multiple techniques, but also exclude men of smaller stature as well. These same people would more than pass the required tests in other nations.

....It's a selection process based on physical prowess. The whole point is to be vigorous. Each nation have their own standards which also goes for the same with paramedics, police and military. There are just some people who can't pass the physical and that's just a state of fact not prejudice.

Depending on how much you were underweight it might have been a non-issue. most guys that I've talked to some people who have failed under that problem in the army and they were just recommended to go to McDonalds and drink protein shakes.

I was 92lbs (41.73 kg) at the time, so yea I don't think junk food was going to help me. I do not think they should have changed their requirements to allow me in, I understood completely, I have always been very petite, and they needed someone bigger. LOL

I am not saying it is necessarily prejudice, I am saying that we should compare our standards to those of other nations and the effectiveness of the different techniques and make changes accordingly to keep our standard up to date. ( The US often gets sets in their ways about MANY things we do) If someone can meet the physical requirements in multiple other nations, but not ours, maybe it is our systems requirements that needs to be be reevaluated.

 

[hentropy]

I don't buy the whole "girls aren't taught they can be a soldier, firefighter, whatever". While I've never been to a Fire Station House. I've been to Army Barracks, Police Stations and Naval Bases. There are plenty of women in all of those roles. I've dealt with more female cops than I have males cop too. In this day and age if women aren't aware of the jobs available (which isn't exactly hard to do either. Hop on the respective branches websites and look at recruiting details) then that's just ignorance on their behalf. In a society where the easiest way to find something out is to Google it, they have no excuse.

You haven't been to a fire house? Usually they're not totally closed to the public. I live in a town less than 20k people and the fire department is completely male. When it comes to soldiers, until very recently women could only serve in the military in non-combat roles, so while they are soldiers in the broadest sense of the term, they are relegated to support roles. They've only been allowed into the military at all since the 1980s. Police have made the most progress, partially because women are more useful in those roles when dealing with female offenders. There was a similar surge in correctional officers at prisons. I'm sure you had detractors back when they did that, as well.

The point is, women being more common in these places is a very new phenomenon, and it's the result of activists trying to make the system more amenable to women. The fact is, however, that girls are still mostly taught consciously or unconsciously by many parents and their society that the jobs that are "for them" are things like nurses and teachers or even lawyers, while boys get fire trucks and police cars and army guys to play with. It's ingrained from a very early age that a woman who is physically strong and fit is more or less undesirable. Society still values and appreciates physically weak women above those that are more "mannish". It works the other way with men, where they can't cry or be sensitive even if they are physically strong and fit and brave for fear of being called gay or a fairy. These are societal standards that aren't going to be resolved quickly or with a single hire.

No one is saying that they are completely oblivious to the women who hold these jobs, but when you've been taught a certain thing your entire life and crafted your life around what society wants you to be (weak), then it doesn't matter how many women you see being police officers, that path was closed to you long ago and pursuing it would be more of a life change than most are willing to undergo. It's like if a man in the infantry suddenly wanted to become a professional ballet dancer, that path closed to him likely long ago.