Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Supreme Court Nominee Sotomayer Friend Of The Underperfoming - Again, Its Obama Payback Time

In her favor, Supreme Court nominee Judge Sonya Sotomayor may be pro maternity, but her only legacy, hence far, in judicial decision-making has been her abysmal judgment on the New Haven Connecticut firefighter case which "threw out the promotion test because the white firefighters did so much better than minority test takers," although the test itself was not proven to be biased in any way.

There are a large number of similar civil service job challenges by employees and applicants across the nation who are citing "racial prejudice" for not being able to get hired or promoted to government jobs because of these "biased tests." Expect Sotomayor's bias, which will reward minorities (blacks comprise 25% of the Democrat vote), to be legislated from the Supreme bench. Currently, courts are siding with the non qualified, so as to "even things out."

Below are several examples how the term "Civil Rights" has been redefined so as to give preferred rights to non qualified, non and under performing citizens, so that they may be guaranteed government jobs, as well as employment which has government connections.

New Haven, CT - Adversity.Net, Tim Fay - "New Haven paid $100,000 to a high stakes diversity testing firm, IO Solutions, Inc. of Illinois, to design the exams to be completely free of any racial bias. This is a necessary step these days in order to avoid charges of disparate impact upon protected minority groups -- and New Haven does have a large population of protected minority groups.

IO Solutions, Inc. is one of a few dozen firms which specializes in this kind of politically correct test design, and they are very good at it. According to court filings, IO Solutions did everything right in designing the New Haven fire department's promotional exams to be completely race-neutral, i.e., to not have a disparate impact upon selected, preferred skin colors.

Yet, when the New Haven FD administered the race-neutral tests in November and December of 2003, white firefighters scored so much higher than their black and brown counterparts that very few preferred minorities would have been promoted to the seven open Captain vacancies, nor to the eight open Lieutenant vacancies, if the exam scores were used. New Haven's city charter requires that they follow a "rule of three" which requires that each open promotional position be filled from among the top three scorers on the exams.

If the "rule of three" were strictly applied to the 2003 promotional exams, it would have resulted in all of the open Captain and Lieutenant positions being filled by the best-qualified, highest scoring candidates.

Unfortunately the best-qualified, highest scoring candidates turned out to be mostly white.


The City Fathers and Mothers of New Haven reacted quickly to this politically unacceptable turn of events. They simply refused to certify the results of their fire department's race-neutral exams, thus effectively nullifying the results.

A reverse discrimination lawsuit was filed by the mostly white, highest-scoring firefighters who insisted that the race neutral exam scores should be used to promote them. Their lawsuit was thrown out by a liberal judge (a Clinton appointee), and the firefighters have filed an appeal which they stand a good chance of winning. More on that later.

The upshot is that as of the date of this posting (12-11-06) -- three years after the race-neutral exams were administered -- vacancies have been allowed to go unfilled and are temporarily occupied by firefighters in an 'acting' capacity. Some of the temporary 'acting' firefighters occupying these positions actually failed the Lieutenant and Captain exams, thereby endangering firefighters under their command and the public at large."

This following example may be the grand slam, trifecta, triple-double, all time powerball winner of discrimination lawsuits if anyone cares to research it. Too much for me! "A Los Angeles firefighter who said she was harassed at work because she is African-American, a woman and a lesbian received a $6.2 million jury award Tuesday in her discrimination case against the city. "

The "boosting" of unqualified minorities (including women) also applies to favoritism in private employment where a business has a government contract, The same goes for hiring practices in academics, and all government jobs. The loss to the Gross Domestic Product because of the hiring of less proficient employees must be in the trillions of dollars, although it is hard to find an academic or government researcher to confirm this - since such research is, of course, verboten.

In the below reports of minorities winning lawsuits on account of "bias testing," examples of the bias are never published. One lawyer can easily persuade a Democrat jury without using solid evidence.

Cleveland Ohio - "More than two dozen African American firefighters filed a lawsuit against the city claiming a promotion test was unfair to their race and was not linked to job performance. The city has agreed to promote 15 black firefighters and pay a $650,000 settlement." (Mar-15-06) [BEACON JOURNAL]

Akron Ohio - Plain Dealer - "A federal jury awarded the 23 firefighters a total of $1.9 million Tuesday, finding that the exams developed by EB Jacobs were biased against white candidates for captain and black candidates for lieutenant. In both instances, the exams discriminated against officers over 40. Because of deficiencies, they contend, blacks were over-promoted to captain and under-promoted to lieutenant [?????????]. The lieutenant test also was skewed in favor of firefighters under age 40, according to the civil lawsuit filed in 2006."

Next, is the unbelievable, and common story describing how the voracious, unequaled harassing by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission hounded a simple Akron businessman for not hiring black employees. The owner of West Point Market did everything humanly possible to seek and hire minority job applicants except shanghaiing them off streets. Minorities simply did not want to work at the business. The EEOC still had the unmitigated gall to charge the market with discrimination, thus starting a three year, very expensive court battle. "

(Continued . . . )

Excepted From Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice By Figler, Robert A.,Dunning, Kenneth A.,Finkle, Todd A.
May Be Read In Full Here

WWW http://joeclarke.net