Before enrolling in a law enforcement academy, applicants should be aware of the physical demands of police officers required to pass the initial comprehensive examination. Police patrol neighborhoods, business neighborhoods and public property, responding to calls of criminal activity or other types of emergencies. Some police officers enforce traffic laws, while others issue arrest warrants and arrest refugees. Police detectives investigate crimes such as murders and robberies, collect evidence, interview witnesses and interview suspects. Police officers often appear in court to testify in criminal trials. During the physical examination of a recruit, medical staff usually perform many tests. The candidate must undergo a urine test to check for conditions such as renal diabetes or albuminuria. The blood test can detect conditions such as infections, cancer, or sexually transmitted diseases. Serious illnesses such as syphilis or HIV often disqualify a police candidate. Police services require officers to have good vision and the ability to correctly perceive colours. Vision requirements exist to protect officers from harm, to prevent them from accidentally harming others, and to ensure that they can provide accurate information when they appear on the witness stand in court. SUBJECT: CIVIL RIGHTS – DISCRIMINATORY EFFECTS OF HEIGHT AND WEIGHT REQUIREMENTS At Jane W.
Robinson, Rep. 46. District, Cocoa Prepared by: Sharyn Smith, Assistant Attorney General QUESTION: Are the minimum height and weight requirements set by the Florida Highway Patrol and Firefighters Standards Council, which all applicants must meet, valid under federal law? SUMMARY: Minimum height and weight requirements that have the effect of denying women and persons of certain foreign origins equal employment opportunity are likely to be invalid under applicable federal law. I have been advised that the Fire Board currently requires all applicants for firefighter employment to be at least 5`6″ tall, weighted in proportion to height. The Florida Highway Patrol requires all candidates to be at least 5`81/2!mfe!x „and weigh 160 pounds. In addition, the Orlando Public Service Commission recently ruled that police officers must meet a minimum height standard of 5`8“. The Fire Board has discussed changing the Board`s minimum height requirements, but no such action has been taken to date. The obvious effect of minimum height and weight requirements, such as those mentioned above, is to deny equal employment opportunities to women, as well as to persons of foreign origin, who tend to be shorter as a statistical class and weigh less than Amerindian men, if they qualify for employment in all other respects. Because of recent federal decisions and laws prohibiting states from denying equal employment opportunity to women and Americans not born in the country, as well as foreigners legally residing in the country, I believe that the general height and weight requirements, if challenged in federal district court in Florida, would likely be invalidated under the equality clause of the U.S. Constitution.
XIV, p. 1; the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. 1983; and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. s. 2000(e) et seq., as amended in 1972. These requirements could only be maintained if the department concerned could credibly demonstrate that minimum height and weight requirements are essential to the performance of the duties of a given post. In Smith v. City of East Cleveland, 363 F. Supp. 1131 (n.a. Ohio, 1973), a group of women filed a civil rights lawsuit who claimed they were denied the opportunity to apply for employment as an East Cleveland police officer because they did not meet the 5`8″ height requirement and the 150-pound weight requirement imposed by the police department.
When the court granted the plaintiffs a declaratory judgment and injunction against the application of the height and weight requirements, it stated: „The associated height and weight requirements were upheld and enforced by the defendants in a lawsuit to hire only men as police officers, and with the effect and intention of excluding almost all female candidates. The Court was unable to find rational support for the height and weight requirements and concluded that these requirements were based solely on the stereotype of the tall police officer. Schmidt v. City of Cleveland, op. cit. cit., c. 1144. (Emphasis added.) So far, three federal counties have decided that under the Civil Rights Acts of 1866 and 1871, 42 U.S.C. ss. In 1981 or 1983, a requirement that has a very different effect on a particular group would be constitutionally impermissible if it is not rationally connected to job performance.
See Smith v. City of East Cleveland, p. 1137 and the cases cited therein. In deciding whether height and weight restrictions are rationally related to job performance, the federal district judge presiding over the Smith case received fifteen days of evidence, including testimony and testimony from seven experts on height and weight requirements alone. All of the Division`s justifications for maintaining the size and weight requirements were thoroughly reviewed by the court and were subsequently rejected as unfounded, questionable or erroneous. In addition, the amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (hereinafter referred to as „the Act“) of 1972 removed the exemption previously granted to states and their political subdivisions as „employers“ in the Act, thereby subjecting states and their political subdivisions to the same employment standards that were previously imposed only on „private employers.“ See 42 U.S.C. s. 2000(e) (Supp.
1973); Bridgeport Guard, Inc. v. Members of Bridgeport Civil Service Com`n., 482 F.2d 1333, 1334 at n.1 (2nd Cir. 1973). See also O`Brien v. Shimp, 356 F. Supp. 1259 (n.d.
ill. 1973). One of the main objectives of the Act is to ensure equal access for men and women to the labour market, Diaz v. Pan Am World Airways, 442 F.2d 385, 386 (5th Cir. 1971), and thus provide a legal basis for the principle of non-discrimination. Weeks v Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Co., 408 F.2d 228, 235 (5th Cir. 1969). Where employers have introduced qualifications for the job which have an exclusionary effect on certain categories of candidates, it must be demonstrated that these requirements are manifestly linked to the proper performance of the jobs for which they are used. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v.
Green, 411 U.S. 792, 802 (1973). The law prohibits not only overt discrimination, but also practices that appear formally non-discriminatory but are in fact discriminatory in practice.
Komentari su zatvoreni.