Suppose you had been in the pest control business for several decades and in that time had performed thousands of pest control jobs, both large and small. Who do you think would be better qualified to say exactly what skills the people you consider hiring should possess: you or someone who has never performed your job?
That question ought to answer itself.
But Cook's Pest Control, apparently weary of a legal battle that has dragged on since 2005, has settled a class-action lawsuit which alleged that a math test Cook's gave to job applicants "disproportionately excludes African-Americans as candidates for jobs, and ... is not a valid predictor of success" on the job.
The terms of the settlement were not disclosed.
What's truly "not valid" is the notion that someone outside the pest control business is somehow competent to determine whether a math test is relevant to a pest control job. It's not just that math skills would enable an employee to make accurate calculations as needed, but that the ability to perform some basic calculations reflects disciplined, orderly, precise thinking and, more generally, an ability to reason.
Those skills come in handy in any workplace and certainly are not confined to any single race. So if some members of any racial group are not performing as well in mathematics as we might hope, the solution is to improve the educational system and to expect more of all students, not to punish companies that seek such skills.
The very idea that expecting workers to have mathematical ability could be biased against black Americans is deeply patronizing and absurd on its face.
related articles »
Unemployment continues to be an authentic problem with a real unemployment rate at 14.3 percent in February which includes those ...
Math tests could be racist if they're required for a job that isn't math-based, according to a recently settled class-action ...
DENVER — A century after the nation’s library building boom, public libraries are under siege: plunging tax revenues are forcing ...
So what you're saying is that you don't respect judges or juries, since they aren't all composed of murderers.
After all, only somebody who committed a murder would know what one is like.
Or you know, maybe you're just showing you have no understanding of the legal system. Which begs the question, how do you know better than the people involved in it? What makes you think you know better? Can't hold yourself to your own standard, can you?
But honestly, if Cook's Pest Control could have shown the legitimate need for the test, they could have won it. They didn't. What does that tell you?
Happywithyourracisim,
So by you agreeing to this ruling you are admitting you think blacks have inferior intellect and the test they take should be adjusted to satisfy what you and your liberals view as their inability to comprehend simple math so to make it easier for them to pass. You sir are a disgusting liberal, racist, bigot and should be ashamed of yourself. You have just proved my point about racism from the left. Thank you very much for your help. You are pathetic.
This same situation played out in Ohio. See here: http://www.daytondailynews.com/news/dayton-news/city-agrees-to-lower-test-scores-for-police-exam-1103409.html
It is reprehensible that standards would be lowered for a job that requires a great deal of physical and mental ability. It is racist to lower them while saying that "blacks can't meet the standard".
joneses, no, I think tests can be manipulated to produce unfair and discriminatory results. You're the disgusting racist and liar, because you're proving my point about the right, that instead of honestly resolving a problem, you're attacking another. The more you lash out, the more you demonstrate it. You should be ashamed of yourself, but you have no conscience, and you have no belief in an honest introspection of reality. If something questions your conscience, you decide that it must be a trick from Satan to make you waver from your faith, so you redouble your efforts.
What you don't realize is that the devil is already guiding your path.
FPSE: So is there nothing reprehensible about artificial standards being imposed that discriminate against people able to actually do the job?
Is there no possible test you can think of that would be unfair and biased, and produce results that are not truly indicative of performance?
What if evidence were produced that Cook's Pest Control had deliberately and willfully sought test systems that would discriminate? What would you say then?
See, there's a problem here, if you think a test is always fair and unbiased.
Also, can you answer my question, if this editorial is questioning alleged "experts" in the field" why is it allowed to do so if they aren't a judge?
Doesn't that seem hypocritical?
No happywiththebulbs, you are doing the obvious and typical liberal retreat from reality into name calling of the other side based on some who may be guilty. While anyone who claims anything negative about anyone on your side, even when it is true, cannot do so in your estimation. You refuse to live the standards or lack thereof which you insist others live by. I think the proper word for it is simply pathetic. Any proven tampering of any testing should be dealt with decisively. But our culture makes discriminatory distinctions which are often false and very harmful. The doctrine of "fairness" is a very illusive one and there is always the possibility when it is applied for one, many or all involved parties to be negatively impacted. Lawsuits as the answer is the most pathetic approach of all and is too present in our current society.
Livn4life, you are doing the obvious and typical conservative retreat into reality by attacking the other side (namely liberals) based on your desire to avoid the real issues. You feel entitled to make all sorts of negative statements about others, no matter how false they are, but if anybody criticizes you, that's a clear insult and attack on your person.
You're just as guilty of failing to live up to your own standards as you claim others are. Really, calling people pathetic? Do you think it convinces me I'm wrong? No, it convinces me I'm correct.
But I just want acknowledgement by YOUR side that some may be guilty of an offense that needs to be remedied, in this particular case, by a biased test. But this applies in general, as I have found that your side has a problem even recognizing that there is a concept of making things right, because if you agree there's a problem, then you have to agree there might be justification of a solution. If you don't believe somebody can possibly offend though the conduct, that's an impediment to a discussion of what to do. People do have issues interacting with each other, and the purpose of the court system is to offer a remedy to those issues.
However, since you flat-out saying lawsuits are pathetic, then suspect you are completely opposed to such methods of conflict solving, so I want to know what you think should be done when people have issues and conflicts with others.
Or should "our culture" do nothing about those discriminatory distinctions which are often false and very harmful? Or any other problem at all?
happywithbeingaracist,
You are pathetic referencing the devil. You absolutely sound foolish referencing the devil but in the next breath you are attacking Christianity and religion. You are absolutely pathetic. But then again what would I expect from someone who worships and blindly follows a guy named Hussein Obama as his Messiah.
Ah, that tired old song, the more you sing it, the more you show you've fallen for your own deceptions.
It seems like the question that needs to be asked here is... Is the same test given to every applicant? If yes, then how can it be discriminatory against any one applicant, regardless of the gender or race?
I refer you to the question I already asked:
Is there no possible test you can think of that would be unfair and biased, and produce results that are not truly indicative of performance?
It doesn't seem to me that it should matter what kind of test is given, as long as the same test is given to all applicants. It could be a math test, an english test, a memory test, or some combination of them all. Why does the test have to be geared directly toward one position in the company? Should a company not try and hire an employee that is versatile, and could move up in the future to other positions, or be cross-trained to fill in when others are absent?
Some companies are now doing credit checks and background checks. I imagine some would think that racist, as well, wanting to ensure the integrity of the prospective employee, and possibly the well being of the other employees. These are not things that follow racial lines. A company should have the ability to judge different attributes of a potential employee.
If a company chooses to look past these things, that's fine. They may need to hire the person with the most experience at that time. One should not think they are guaranteed a job, that's why the application process is done.
chatt_man, so are you saying that there is no possible test that you can think of that would be unfair and biased, and produce results that are not truly indicative of performance?
Is that what you are saying?
Because that is what I am getting from "it doesn't seem to me that it should matter what kind of test is given" because the composition of a test CAN be quite unfair and biased. Tests are not completely impartial measurements, they are quite capable of biases and judgments based on what the person writing it thinks they need to test. This may not be an accurate estimation, as any person is subject to error, even aside from willful attempts to be discriminatory.
Or have I read you wrong?
But who wants to be guaranteed a job? Some of us just want to be guaranteed a fair chance at a job, and unlike you, we do realize that not all "tests" are as fair as you seemingly believe.
If you don't think a test can be unfair, that it will always give you accurate results, then how can we convince you otherwise? Would you like to read some of the analysis of them? Would you like to see how courts have found such tests to be inadequate, with lengthy and extensive examinations of them and the results?
happy, you left out the most important part of the quote, the last part, "as long as the same test is given to all applicants". What I'm saying is, this all started over a math test. And what I'm asking is, how can a math test be biased or unfair? Biased or unfair might be testing people from other countries on American History, but this was a math test.
I left it out because it doesn't matter, I've been assuming it was the same test as a rule. I'm baffled that you think your distinction is meaningful in any way.
So it's the same test. So what?
That doesn't make it fair. Are you completely unable to recognize how a test can be unfair?
Even in math, it's possible for a test to be biased, because you know what? They sometimes have problems based on concepts that people just aren't familiar with. This doesn't reflect on them, or what they know, just what they've been taught. Math isn't a single unified subject, there are different ways to present things, and yes, some math tests do include word problems or expressions that a person may not have seen before.
Does this test? I don't know. Neither do you. we don't have a single question that was on it, and the argument presented here has not been that "this test was fair" but "no way can a test be unfair" which is why I'm trying to establish the principle that a test CAN be unfair, since that's something you (and others) are having a problem accepting, though you apparently can do it for certain subjects.
Which is getting closer to the point. But still, I feel it's appropriate in this case to establish not whether this given test was fair, but whether ANY given test can be unfair.
Have we gotten to that, and now you're trying to argue that this test may not be? Or do you still not wish to say that a test can be biased and unfair?
Well, if you want to argue that this test is not unfair, please show us the questions on it, and the results of the testing.
As someone who has personally seen and taken the test, I can tell you that it contains questions such as "If a room is 20 ft long by 22 ft wide, what is the square footage of the room?" This is probably one of the more difficult questions on the test. The same test is given to every applicant, and does not ask for you race. The math test is used to ensure the applicant contains the basic skills necessary to perform the job required (ex: chemical calculations, pricing, etc.) The idea that a basic math test is "biased" and that someone can scream racial discrimination over the result of not passing is absurd...regardless of color. Anybody that thinks different is just looking for a handout. Certain jobs require certain skills...if one is not capable of proving they have enough skills to do the job, then that simply means they are NOT QUALIFIED to do the job. If I were to take a nursing exam and did not pass the test, should I still be given a job in that field? NO! This company has a large number African American employees...so how can you say that it's racial discrimination?
Or login with:
New Account