Donald Campbell 
Member since Sep 2, 2017


Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “City appeals ruling that CSPD testing discriminates against women

"evidence presented at trial shows female Officers passed the 2014 PAT at 82.65 percent the rate of male Officers, resulting in no legally significant disparate impact and no basis for claiming the PAT discriminates against female Officers."

Courts have typically followed the "(Less Than) 80% Rule" in determining whether illegal job discrimination has occurred, so if the female pass rate actually was 82.65% as stated in the article, the plaintiffs haven't established a prima facie case of illegal discrimination, and the suit would normally be dismissed.

However, there's a wrinkle in this case.

Judge Matsch seems to be questioning not just the pass/fail ratios of women vs men, but whether the test actually predicts officer job performance. That is, do officers who score higher on the test actually perform better on the job? While the test might APPEAR to predict job performance on the surface, does it ACTUALLY do so? Do officers who score lower on the test actually perform lower on the job? And do officers who score higher on the test actually perform higher on the job?

The CSPD will need to produce some actual, objective evidence demonstrating such a connection. If not, it really doesn't matter what the women scored or the men scored: we don't know how the scores relate to what we're interested in (i.e., job performance) and in fairness, the test scores shouldn't be used for personnel decision-making.

1 like, 0 dislikes
Posted by Donald Campbell on 09/02/2017 at 4:11 PM

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

All content © Copyright 2017, The Colorado Springs Independent

Website powered by Foundation