ETH 501 - Business Ethics
In the city of New Haven, Connecticut, eligible firefighters from New Haven Fire Department took a written multiple-choice test and oral exam for promotions to lieutenant and captain. From this test results, fifteen test takers were selected for a position of a lieutenant and a captain. The fourteen out of fifteen selected candidates were white firefighters which created public disturbance which led to the department decision not to use the test results. From this development, the selected candidates filed a law suit against the city of New Haven for reverse racial discrimination. The law suit reached all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court and found that the lower court ruling violated the rights of non-minority firefighter candidates that passed the exam.
After the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, the following question ascends, “Did the city of New Haven act reasonably in rejecting the test results based on the lack of minority representations?” I think not. Based on the Webster dictionary, the test is defined as any standardized procedures for measuring sensitivity, memory, intelligence, aptitude or personality, etc. In this case, the test was a measurement of knowledge in the professional field of firefighting. Being a lieutenant or a captain in a dangerous occupation such as a firefighter, requires experience, knowledge, courage and leadership skills to effectively manage and the ability to assess risk tolerance for the safety of the employees. Last time I checked, danger does not seek particular ethnic color nor does it discriminate against gender. I just don’t see the justification in promoting segregation in the promotion process. The promotion process should be strictly based on selection screening mechanism to identify the best qualified individual to perform his or her responsibilities and it should not discriminate against: race, color, gender, or religion. In this case, the New Haven Firefighters Department should...