MassCops - Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network, A Mass Police Web Portal

Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network

Massachusetts Police News, Information and Discussions on MassCops

Pages: 1

Main Page Racial/ gender preferences & Veteran's Preference
(Click here to view the original thread on the MassCops Message Board)

Posted by: JCM1975

Does anyone think that Mass. will ever rid itself of racial, gender and veteran's preference? Since when does being a minority, woman or veteran make someone a better Cop? New Hampshire seems to do it properly, hiring the best candidate..... they just want the best Cop, whether or not they are a minority, male/ female or veteran...... Hopefully veterans do not take offense to this, I just want the most qualified officers to be hired in my community, not an ultimate preference because someone choose to go in the military (which is obviously honorable, but does not mean they can handle a domestic better than a non-vet).

Posted by: no$.10

QUOTE=JCM1975-"...New Hampshire seems to do it properly, hiring the best candidate....."

Most of the NH departments I know of do not have a residency requirement, either. You should feel free to apply anywhere there may be a posting up there.

"... I just want the most qualified officers to be hired in my community,"

Yeah. Right.

Posted by: Wolfman

From a purely physiological and disciplinary standpoint, and certain exceptions aside, male veterans make better cops.

Posted by: laxball33

Someone serves our great country and risks the possibility of losing their life serving, they don't deserve a leg up, they've earned it.
And unless you've already had full time police experience, who are you to say you are better qualified until you're out of the academy doing the job along side of them. Just because you went to college and some others decided to serve in the military doesn't make you any better of a candidate.

And as far as someone getting the job over you because of their color or nationality, well some counties in the south might still hold your beliefs so I suggest you go down there and apply with the like minded.
Believe it from my experience you are happy that guy next to you is bilingual when someone you are dealing with is telling his buddy in a language you can't understand to take off or hide the drugs and your partner is already way ahead of him.
Just my belief....

Posted by: sylvester

as long as people are stupid enough to vote for dummycrats, there will always be racial quotas... whatever happened to merit ? Affirmative Action is the most flagrant racism.. it assumes that minorities are too stupid to earn the job on their own capabilities and intelligence... whats the point of the test...? Democrats assume that blacks are stupid and need points given to them - that is an insult.

Posted by: Macop

JMC1975 I agree with you. Male veterns do not make better cops, male balck veterns dont make better cops non male veterns dont make better cops, non male black veterns dont make better cops. The point is that just because you are a vet/academy trained and so on and so forth does not make you a better cop. We all know its whats inside that makes you a better cop not whats on the outside.

And just because you went in the military and not college does not make you a better candidate. And if you decide to join, kudos to ya, but its a choice that was made, no one forced you or me for that matter. And color/nationality should not play a part but it does.

Posted by: Officer Dunngeon

The only reason why race and gender preferences exist are to fill equal opportunity quotas for fairness in hiring and to promote a diversity within police departments that can reflect upon the community.

For example, say you have a city with a particular ethnic population. I really don't see how Paddy O'Brien is going to communicate very well in Chinatown with Kung Pao if there were no quota for Chinese-speaking officers... and the odds of an Irish guy speaking Chinese fluently are pretty slim to none.

Of COURSE the most qualified appliant should get the job. Unfortunately, if it weren't for these race and gender preferences, then police departments would be composed of mainly officers hired by patronage and nepotism, regardless of their color, what's in their pants, or if they served in the armed forces or not. So in terms of "fairness" to plain old non-vet white males (I'm assuming that's the point of this thread), even if there were no preferences it wouldn't make a difference cause non-vet white dudes are being passed up now and non-vet white dudes would STILL be passed up in the hiring process for some captain's nephew or whatever, provided they don't have that big, fat dime to help them out.

Yes, in a lot of ways, this practice is outdated, unnecessary and unfair. I think when it comes to civil service, veterans should be awarded extra points like the way the MSP does it. As for females, let be realistic here - how many females compared to males actually take the civil service exam and apply for police positions? The numbers are definitely lower due to the fact that law enforcement is a typically a male-dominated field. I don't think we're that big of a "threat"

because there isn't an equal number of females stepping up for this job as there are males. That's not to say that females should be given preference over a male with a higher score on the police exam... but what if she's applying to a small municipality with absolutely NO female officers? I think every department should have at least 1 per shift!

I agree with Wolfman's perspective "from a purely physiological and disciplinary standpoint" that veterans would make "better cops," but I generally disagree with the male part (despite the notation of "exceptions"). I guess ideally, yes, a male veteran would be "better" in terms of self-defense and command presence if he was like 6'4" and 260+ lbs. of rock solid blue steel; but say we're talking about a little guy at 5'5" and 140 lbs.... eh... nah!

In closing... don't hate the playa, hate the game, yo!

Posted by: mpd61

Fact: short of a BCD or a string of NJP's in their background, Veterans have exhibited an ability to work as a team member, respect chain of command, follow orders/procedures/policies, and handle stress. Traits that are worth a couple extra points of consideration.
This says nothing about the choice made to serve country/society.
=D>
Females need consideration when they are not present or under-represented by many municipalities or agencies. The appointing authority can (should) always chose the "best" candidate from lists such as Bi-lingual or female.

Posted by: 7MPOC

Quote:

Originally Posted by JCM1975

Does anyone think that Mass. will ever rid itself of racial, gender and veteran's preference? Since when does being a minority, woman or veteran make someone a better Cop? New Hampshire seems to do it properly, hiring the best candidate..... they just want the best Cop, whether or not they are a minority, male/ female or veteran...... Hopefully veterans do not take offense to this, I just want the most qualified officers to be hired in my community, not an ultimate preference because someone choose to go in the military (which is obviously honorable, but does not mean they can handle a domestic better than a non-vet).

Many towns dont have those preferances, they are called non-civil service police departments, all you have to do is apply. And No, they will not ever go away, not veteran status anyhow, I know when towns satisfy there consent/gender formula they just hire off the list. As far as the resident rule,I saw in your other post, your dreaming if you think that will go away. Someone who resides in a town for a lifetime should have a leg up on someone from another town, think of the knowledge they would have do to living in the town would be a true asset. Just my opinion. Also veteran status has been around forever,(since civil service at least) and there is a reason, And Im totally serious so dont laugh, if you havent seen the movie Rambo, watch it! Its a great movie, but it also shows how veterans were pissed on after they protected this country and couldnt get a job because they had no college education, so the government gave them assistance in getting police,fire,postal jobs etc. and remember back in the days police jobs werent anything great so no one wanted them, now they have much more appeal and security. There are a lot more applicants than jobs available. Also I dont know if this is true I did hear that only 1 out of 100 people who take the civil service test get a job. Thats should say something about how many people are taking the test.

Posted by: laxball33

Quote:

Originally Posted by 7MPOC

Also I dont know if this is true I did hear that only 1 out of 100 people who take the civil service test get a job. Thats should say something about how many people are taking the test.

I think you're being kind. I remeber how many names were listed as a resident under me and I never saw any of those faces. With the budget cuts and less hiring going on jobs aren't as plentiful as in the late 90's.

Posted by: SinePari

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpd61

The appointing authority can (should) always chose the "best" candidate from lists such as Bi-lingual or female.

Correct. The BEST possible candidate for a city or town, at any given time varies, and the hiring authority should be flexible as to whom they are considering to hire. Framingham for example, has a huge Brazilian population. Do you speak Portugese? If not, why should they hire you, everything else being equal, over someone who does?

I can relate to the people who are waiting on lists forever, and getting passed up by someone who, in your opinion, isn't the best candidate. Don't be bitter, just make yourself the best possible candidate for any agency willing to give you an interview.

Posted by: DVET1979

As far as the bilingual factor goes, it is a definite plus, but if a pair of individuals dont speak English and you and your partner only speak English, handcuff the subject(s) and articulate in your report that by refusing to speak English, the subject(s) made you feel unsafe so it was neccessary for the responding officer(s) to escalate their use of force. I have seen it done before. If we as a society confromed to non-English speaking elements, we would cease to be the society we are sworn to protect and serve. ITS AMERICA-LEARN&SPEAK ENGLISH OR LEAVE!!!!!

Posted by: Patriot

As much as I have a definite opinion on this matter, I will attempt to tread lightly as this is an inherently volatile subject.

I believe in my heart that the least this country can do for a legitimate veteran (ie. overseas duty, combat vets etc.) is allow them to come home and risk their life as they have done abroad. I think it speaks to the dedication of military vets that they serve their country at their own peril overseas, and return home with a desire to serve their communities... at their peril. I have nothing but respect for any veteran on the job.

That being said, I think the system needs to be adjusted. If someone were serving in a branch of the US Armed Forces and their unit was activated but did not deploy, then I say give them a fixed amount of points, say from +2 to +5. However, combat vets, and those who serve in a forward area or combat zone should continue to go to the top of the list providing they pass.

Now, holding the above true how then exactly does minority preference equal combat or disabled veteran status? Should a condition of birth equal the preference given someone who knowingly and willingly served their country in combat? I would suggest that a more equitable solution is to grant minorities the same +2 to +5 that non deployed veterans would receive under my suggested sytem.

Does this not seem like a fair solution to the preference dilema? Combat vets would continue to have their contribution validated, other veterans would receive points to validate their contributions, and minorities would receive points to offset perceived bias in the system.

And the non-veteran white male still better hope he nails the test.

Posted by: kwflatbed

" minorities would receive points to offset perceived bias in the system."

Why should minorities recieve points ?????????

Veterans yes for thier service to thier country.

Posted by: PBC FL Cop

Quote:

Originally Posted by kwflatbed

" minorities would receive points to offset perceived bias in the system."

Why should minorities recieve points ?????????

Just for being born I guess

Posted by: SinePari

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patriot

Now, holding the above true how then exactly does minority preference equal combat or disabled veteran status?

Accusations of racial bias + law suit = consent decree. Veterans haven't sued yet.

Posted by: pablo

A person posted earlier that he thought Male veterans make the best candidates. From my experience this is not always true. In my Dept the officers with the most complaints and discipline issues are both male veterans,these guys have made it into a science-getting into trouble. The simplest things get them into trouble. My opinion is that some and I repeat some!! Veterans just cant adjust to how police agencies function. The military is very structured,organized and rigid there also is not alot of grey areas- things are black or white period. Contrast that with Policing, My agencie is not very structured,rigid and is semi organized. Chain of Command is obeyed, but loosley at best. additionally most of policing deals with grey areas. Some people just can not adjust to it. Again I am not saying all Veterans just a few. This is not meant to disrespect our men and woman in the services its just my opinon from my own experiences.

Posted by: GARDA

Let's give the background investigator, oral board/panel interview process, and the ultimate hiring authority some credit here...

These preferences are NOT ABSOLUTE. They may get someone looked at, who may otherwise not have been, but that's where the system remains flexible enough for most to live with as it is.

Right or wrong, if you are a strong enough candidate to keep the employer's attention AFTER the interview, you must be doing something right. If not, then preference is a moot point...meaning: you must have other shortcomings/detractors which will be revealed during the hiring process... Only drawback here, never getting that interview in the first place.

Reasonable Solution = As someone said, commit to making yourself the strongest candidate in the field of applicants, as it should be. If your hope of becoming a cop still does not happen after all that...perhaps it is as simple as this: It was never meant to be, time to move on.

Posted by: Wolfman

Quote:

Originally Posted by pablo

My agencie is not very structured,rigid and is semi organized. Chain of Command is obeyed, but loosley at best. additionally most of policing deals with grey areas. Some people just can not adjust to it.

So do you suppose that the flimsy departmental structure is a result of the loose adherance to a chain of command, or the other way around?

Anyhow, grey areas are for court. In the field, on the street, in the crisis situations that pop up at a moments notice, I will still rather have a military veteran by my side than a sorority girl who knows how to speak Taiwanese.

Posted by: pablo

depends on how good looking the sorority girl is LOL.

Posted by: Hartmn

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolfman

From a purely physiological and disciplinary standpoint, and certain exceptions aside, male veterans make better cops.

Says who? I have seen nothing to support that argument in 18+ years.. especially from the "physiological" standpoint unless you are limiting that to strictly gender issues.. Are you quoting a study, or making it up?

Posted by: Patriot

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hartmn

Well, let me ask you how many male veterans do you work with, and how many non-male veterans?

I can state that from my experience I agree completely with that statement. I work in a large municipal department, I can state that male veterans make better cops, with exceptions noted as in the original comment.

Male veterans tend to be stronger and in much better shape, and stay in better shape after on for awhile. They tend to develop command presence faster, and much more effectively. They tend to be more disciplined in physical appearance, including haircuts and uniform appearance (ie shined boots, crisp uniforms). They tend to be more reliable in high stress situations, easier to train on the street, and more consistent. They tend to be much better at marksmanship (the vast majority of SWAT members are military trained). Couple the male advantages of strenghth and size with military training, followed by police training... I really could go on and on...

My point is that the statement was valid based on my years and experience.

ma police, boston ma police, massachusetts police, massachusetts police, mass state police, mass police, ma, mass, massachusetts, massachusetts, massachutes, massachusetts law, massachusetts polece, police, officer, police officer, cops, police gear, law enforcement, police duty gear, state police, sheriff, law, police supply, police agency directory, police agency, police department, traffic officer, police dept, state trooper, dispatcher, massachusetts county sheriff, massachusetts sheriff, massachusetts department of corrections, ma doc, doc, dept of corrections, police information, civil service, ma civil service, massachusetts crime, police training, police academy, ma police academy, massachusetts officers, masscop, masscops, mpa, bpa, ibpoa, police association, massachusetts police news, massachusetts crime news, mass most wanted, police career information, police patrol, police administration, police books, crime scene training, police discussion, crime discussions, cops

About MassCops, the home for Massachusetts law enforcement.

The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network opened in 1998 and is now a part of the New England Police Network The site is a pro-police discussion forum intended for sworn police officers and civilian law enforcement officials as well as those interested in pursuing a career in law enforcement here in Massachusetts.

The goal of The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network is to provide an informal network of law enforcement officials here in Massachusetts for educational and informational purposes.

The forum covers many topics such as Police Related News Articles, Agency & Profession Discussions, Police Training as well as Law Enforcement Career Information.

The Massachusetts Law Enforcement Network and The New England Police Network (NEPN) and it's network sites are privately owned websites/domains and are not affiliated with or endorsed by any government association or agency.

MassCops (masscops.com) and (masscop.com) are privately owned are not affiliated with or endorsed by the Massachusetts Coalition of Police (masscop.org)

3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 49 50 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108