NY - Woman to become NY firefighter despite failing crucial fitness test

[LonghornSpeakEasy]

So she can be the designated fire extinguisher chick. Cool.

I always thought that every firefighter was supposed to be capable of performing all of the possible things that firefighters might have to do at the scene of a fire, but I guess it's great if they want to designate different classes of firefighting. A fire extinguisher class. A hose hydrant connector class. A cherry picker operator class. And a class that actually goes into burning buildings and carries out unconscious people. For large departments that have enough firefighters, that might work, sure. It would make scheduling shifts more complicated, but I see no reason not to do it that way.

I wonder if it would be objectionable if the "go into burning buildings and save people" group got extra pay for hazardous duty.

Funny, my firefighter nephew recently worked his way up to where he can drive the fire engine. Although he thinks that's cool, he doesn't like to do it because the driver has to stay with the truck and can't go into the burning building! What I think about is that tiny little boy playing ninja turtles with his cousin (my son) driving that big, old truck!

 

[Nova]

I didn't say the woman in question would be a mere "administrative" employee. I just said there are various duties requiring varying amounts of strength.

As other posters wrote above, who would want a job where she would endanger herself and others? (Such a person might exist, I suppose, but we have no evidence that THIS person would do so.)

THE NEW YORK POST is a traditionally conservative (in the sense of playing on readers' outrage at any and all changes) paper. We can't know from a few paragraphs that this woman's hiring actually poses a threat to anyone.

 

[sonjay]

How many years of firefighting experience have you got under your belt?

120. How about you?

 

[sonjay]

It's a very physically demanding test. They have to be able to carry a large amount of weight, etc. The test is clearly not designed for a female.
Most women can't physically compete with men (which is why men and women compete separately in sports).
So if they want more female firefighters, they have to lower the standard.

Firefighting isn't a make-works jobs program. It requires people who can actually perform the physical tasks required for firefighting.

Lower standards are fine for make-work jobs programs where ability to perform the actual job isn't a life-or-death matter.

 

[Dana]

Wow, I'd sure hate to be the fireman scheduler. Every single one of them would have to have a double that does those same specific jobs in order to get a day off. So, hypothetically, if the only, let's say 2, firemen qualified to run into a burning building get badly hurt, no one else would be physically qualified to replace them on the fly???? I suppose we're all willing to pay extra for the double amount of firemen needed since they all do specific jobs. BTW, my nephew is quite irritated over this news and would love to make the same pay by just hanging out if needed while others put their lives on the line. He told me, if you can't pull your own weight working as a crew, then you're out. No, those tests are NOT a one time deal, they periodically take them in the course of their careers. Firemen DO get hurt on the job, they DO need to be replaced at the moment of a burning building, not at shift change.

I have a question. Why does this ONE particular individual get a 'be a fireman' pass when other women have passed those tests? I suppose I should be Apple computers' top CEO if I do NOT qualify but hey, that's what I want - without training or tests.

I really don't understand dumbing down America. If something is required and it works fine, nope, we have to change the rules because of 1 person. How about we hire senior citizen firemen because after all, not all of them have to lift heavy things.

 

[rob]

So she can be the designated fire extinguisher chick. Cool.

I always thought that every firefighter was supposed to be capable of performing all of the possible things that firefighters might have to do at the scene of a fire, but I guess it's great if they want to designate different classes of firefighting. A fire extinguisher class. A hose hydrant connector class. A cherry picker operator class. And a class that actually goes into burning buildings and carries out unconscious people. For large departments that have enough firefighters, that might work, sure. It would make scheduling shifts more complicated, but I see no reason not to do it that way.

I wonder if it would be objectionable if the "go into burning buildings and save people" group got extra pay for hazardous duty.

And if the fire extinquisher chick doesn't get paid as much as the ones entering the building and doing the heavy/dangerous work, she'll file a lawsuit and sue for gender discrimination, because 'equal pay for equal work' and never mind that it's not equal work. all moo
BTW, I am a woman.

 

[Sonya610]

How about we hire senior citizen firemen because after all, not all of them have to lift heavy things.

This woman is paving the way for THAT too.

Not only could she NOT pass the test but the age limit for recruits is 29, she is 33 so that was changed on her behalf as well.

I feel sorry for all of the other firemen, but I especially feel sorry for the firewomen that worked their butts off to pass that test and hopefully be accepted as equals in male dominated firehouses. As the article points out it sets a precedence that will likely make the men question the qualifications of any new female hires since they might have just gotten a "waiver" instead of being truly qualified.

That is very unfair to the women that DID pass the test fair and square.

 

[katydid23]

You ALL, as well as the POST, are talking as if every firefighter does the same job. I doubt that is the case.

Assuming this woman can't be the one who carries a 300-pound man down from the third floor, that doesn't mean she can't be the one who carries the fire extinguisher up to the blaze. (There was a rerun of LAW & ORDER the other day where they went through the tasks of a team that enters a burning building: IIRC, there were at least four separate jobs requiring different levels of physical ability among the members of a six-person team.)

And who is to say she will even be inside a building? Maybe her job will be attaching the hose to the hydrant or operating the "cherry picker".

The point is many professions are rethinking these "tests" and other rites of passage that are basically hazing rituals unnecessary to ably do the job. I'm guessing firefighting has changed considerably since the test was designed.

EVERY team consists of individuals with varying abilities, and a good supervisor assigns tasks with these variations in mind. That one member of the team lacks the upper body strength of some others (and who says all male firefighters have maintained the strength they had when they passed the test?) doesn't mean the team can't excel as a whole or that public safety has been sacrificed.

Sorry to say this, Nova. You know i love and respect you. But in this case, I totally disagree.

I think that EVERY firefighter that enters a burning building NEEDS to be capable of carrying an unconscious body back to safety. Who would want to enter a dangerous wall of flames, knowing that if you were injured, your partner could not carry you to safety?

 

[jjenny]

The article I read said other women have passed the test so it's not impossible for a woman to pass it. This particular woman could perform all of the tasks--just not in the time period required. I believe she was given 3 opportunities.

One question I have is whether or not firefighters have to pass this test annually or if once passed, they're in for good. If they don't have to repeatedly qualify, I think it lessens the argument that she won't be able to do her job. We've all seen those police officers where we wonder how they can chase a suspect down as they're obviously not in the best shape. Not sure if this happens with firefighters. I'll have to ask my firefighter nephew.

It's not impossible for a woman to pass it. Just very few women can pass it. They have 0.5% female and 99.5% male firefighters in NY.

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

FDNY is urged to hire more women

http://www.my9nj.com/story/27598248/fdny-is-urged-to-hire-more-women

"In the year 2014, when women serve on the front lines of combat in our armed services, there is no reason for this lack of women in the FDNY," said Council member Elizabeth Crowley of Queens, who chaired a hearing on examining ways to increase the number of female firefighters."

I'm all for equality for women however I don't think the standards should be lowered just so you can have an "acceptable" number of women on the job. Why lower the standards for NY city firefighters? Should we lower the standard for neurosurgeons, teachers, etc. to get an adequate number of minority? No way! This woman was hired as a "token female" in my opinion.

Rookie firefighter injuries rise after FDNY lowers standards

http://nypost.com/2014/09/26/rookie-firefighter-injures-rise-after-fdny-lowers-standards/

"An unprecedented number of fire recruits have been injured during probie training this year — after the department dropped its normally rigorous standards and hired a host of “physically unprepared” wannabes, department *insiders claim."

 

[musicaljoke]

My sister-in-law is a fire fighter. She has abs of steal and is as strong as a horse. She can get into a harness and pull the fire engine along the ground. She comes from a long family of fire fighters.

She can't lift a 100kg ladder by herself in under 20 seconds, but she can and does throw an adult man over her shoulder and carry him out of a fire. The men she works with respect her.

It's 2015. There are many competent female firefighters who don't pass every detail of the archaic tests. It's time to get over it.

 

[Dana]

This woman is paving the way for THAT too.

Not only could she NOT pass the test but the age limit for recruits is 29, she is 33 so that was changed on her behalf as well.

That is very unfair to the women that DID pass the test fair and square.

RSBM
I forgot about the age limit, ty for pointing that out Sonya! I have to wonder who's daughter or niece she is that gets to bypass the rules.

And I agree BayouBelle, I surely wouldn't want a surgeon opening me up if he wasn't capable to do his job or a lawyer who didn't pass the bar because well, it was just too hard!

There is a VERY good reason these rules and tests are in place and it's to save lives, not save minorities a job.

 

[Dana]

Well, I'm not going to debate the issue anymore. Go women who aren't fully qualified, more power to ya's. I'm so happy I don't live in NY and have to worry about someone being incapable of saving my life that should be. I think all people everywhere should work any job they please qualified or not simply because we have to make everyone happy, oh and get the same pay. Good luck with that!

 

[jjenny]

This woman is paving the way for THAT too.

Not only could she NOT pass the test but the age limit for recruits is 29, she is 33 so that was changed on her behalf as well.

I feel sorry for all of the other firemen, but I especially feel sorry for the firewomen that worked their butts off to pass that test and hopefully be accepted as equals in male dominated firehouses. As the article points out it sets a precedence that will likely make the men question the qualifications of any new female hires since they might have just gotten a "waiver" instead of being truly qualified.

That is very unfair to the women that DID pass the test fair and square.

But what is fair? If the department is 99.5% male and 0.5% female, are these tests fair to females?

 

[Trident]

But what is fair? If the department is 99.5% male and 0.5% female, are these tests fair to females?

Maybe not, but I believe they are fair for those needing to be rescued from fires. In the long run, isn't that what really counts?

 

[corundogs]

I have no dog in this fight...

But are there men being denied a job that want it, who are qualified??

If so, I disagree with this. If not, and they need bodies, I am quite sure there are plenty of things she can actually do.

 

[sonjay]

But what is fair? If the department is 99.5% male and 0.5% female, are these tests fair to females?

Firefighting requires physical strength. Is it fair that most men are stronger than most women? Life isn't fair. This shouldn't be news to anyone.

Letting women (or men, or children, or people in wheelchairs, or people with asthma) who can't pass the physical tests be firefighters doesn't magically make them stronger or any more able to carry unconscious people out of burning buildings.

Like I said, lowering the standards is fine for make-work jobs programs, but it puts actual, real lives at risk when its done for jobs such as firefighting. Putting innocent people at risk in attempts to be "fair" isn't .... um.... fair.

 

[Trident]

Lower the standards for one and in no time at all you have a department that can't cut the mustard. I don't live there either, and I sure wouldn't want to with a bunch that can't measure up.

 

[Trident]

Firefighting requires physical strength. Is it fair that most men are stronger than most women? Life isn't fair. This shouldn't be news to anyone.

Letting women (or men, or children, or people in wheelchairs, or people with asthma) who can't pass the physical tests be firefighters doesn't magically make them stronger or any more able to carry unconscious people out of burning buildings.

Like I said, lowering the standards is fine for make-work jobs programs, but it puts actual, real lives at risk when its done for jobs such as firefighting. Putting innocent people at risk in attempts to be "fair" isn't .... um.... fair.

Men ARE stronger, and women CAN give birth. Each has an important place, but IF a woman can pass the test, more power to her. If she can't, there are plenty of other jobs. I'm a normal sized woman who was a trucker, better than some, but not all. You do what you can, but you need to do it well without putting others in jeopardy.

 

[sonjay]

Men ARE stronger, and women CAN give birth. Each has an important place, but IF a woman can pass the test, more power to her. If she can't, there are plenty of other jobs. I'm a normal sized woman who was a trucker, better than some, but not all. You do what you can, but you need to do it well without putting others in jeopardy.

ITA. I'm absolutely not opposed to women being firefighters — provided they're capable of doing the job.

I'm opposed to lowering the standards in order to hire people who can't do the job, in the name of "fairness."