Massachusetts Cop Forum banner
Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 14 of 14 Posts

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #6 ·
I thought you didn't have to select MBTA, that everyone was in the running automatically. But anyhow, as a non-vet I knew I had no shot anyhow. This total preferential treatment [for any group] has to go. I can see adding a couple of point's to a score, like the State Police does, but to take a whole group and put them above another, isn't that descrimination?
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
ProudAmerican said:
That's a negative! If someone serves his/her country honorably in the armed forces, they SHOULD get preferential treatment in civil service jobs. I for one I'm proud to take advantage of my veteran status. God bless our men and women serving in uniform. It is a thankless job, but that's not why we serve.
I just want to make clear that my intention is not to offend any veterans. I too served but in the reserves, for 8 years. However, I do think it's unfair for a 3 year full-time soldier(who for example did not get deployed) to get preferential treatment while someone who served for 8 years in the gurds or reserves does not, especially when both served honorably and [these days] faced the same deployment risks.
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
After graduating college I considered going active but then got on the Dept. of Corrections. The definition of a Veteran does need to be re-written to include reservists but in either case, TOTAL preferential treatment to any group [in my opinion] is discrimination. The state police doesn't give total preferential treatment to any group, they give 2 extra points. Also, you telling me that a none-vet scoring 100%, thus proving that he/she posses the skills they were just tested for should be ranked below a vet who scores a 70% - who obviously does not have the the skills tested...makes no sense to me.
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Skidaddy said:
Also, you telling me that a none-vet scoring 100%, thus proving that he/she posses the skills they were just tested for should be ranked below a vet who scores a 70% - who obviously does not have the the skills tested...makes no sense to me.

WHAT HAS THAT NON-VET DONE FOR THIS COUNTRY? YOUR DAM RIGHT WE SHOULD GET PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. DID THEY SCARFICE WHAT WE HAVE? I HIGHLY DOUBT THAT....

I BET IF YOU SERVED ACTIVE DUTY OR ON THE FRONTLINES, YOU WOULDN'T BE COMPLAINING ABOUT IT.
Touchy. Look, I can't blame those who recieve vetrens prefrance for opposing any changes in Veteran status treatment. I am also not trying to take away from any service you have given to this great coutry of ours. I am not reffering to people who did not serve in the military, I am reffering to people who did but do not get recognized for it. I was 11-B for many years, have gone through various advanced schools, and was ready to go serve on the front lines. I put my time in just like the active folks did and was ready to sacrifice if called upon.

What about vet's who served in country (before this war) who sat behind a desk? They did their 3 years behind a desk and are now vets? Bullshit!
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #15 ·
Skidaddy said:
Also, you telling me that a none-vet scoring 100%, thus proving that he/she posses the skills they were just tested for should be ranked below a vet who scores a 70% - who obviously does not have the the skills tested...makes no sense to me.

WHAT HAS THAT NON-VET DONE FOR THIS COUNTRY? YOUR DAM RIGHT WE SHOULD GET PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. DID THEY SCARFICE WHAT WE HAVE? I HIGHLY DOUBT THAT....

I BET IF YOU SERVED ACTIVE DUTY OR ON THE FRONTLINES, YOU WOULDN'T BE COMPLAINING ABOUT IT.
Touchy. Look, I can't blame those who receive veterans preference for opposing any changes in Veteran status treatment. I am also not trying to take away from any service you have given to this great country of ours. I am not referring to people who did not serve in the military, I am referring to people who did but do not get recognized for it. I was 11-B for many years, have gone through various advanced schools, and was ready to go serve on the front lines. I put my time in just like the active folks did and was ready to sacrifice if called upon.

What about vet's who served in country (before this war) who sat behind a desk? They did their 3 years behind a desk and are now vets? Bullshit!
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #20 ·
Let's put aside who is and who is not considered a vet. That's not my issue. My issue is the TOTAL PREFERANTIAL treatment a veteran receives. Now assuming that the Civil Service does truly and accurately test for those skills that a police officer should poses, to put a vet scoring a 70 above a none vet scoring a 100 is asinine. This person with a 70 obviously does not poses the skills that the state has deemed crucial for a police officer while the person scoring 100 does, yet he may not be called...
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #22 ·
ProudAmerican said:
Are you shitting me? Do you truly believe that the rediculous test known as the civil service exam, is a true indication of ones intelligence, or ability to be an effective police officer?

I don't care if a vet scored a 50 and a nonvet scored a 1000. The vet should still get preference. There wouldn't be any civil service jobs if it were not for the sacrifices of vets. It is because of the vet that you're not required to utter the words 'God save the queen, or have German as your primary language!".

You can't choose your race, or your gender, but you CAN certainly CHOOSE to become a vet. Recruiting is at an all-time low. Do something for yourself and your country, become a vet!...(disclaimer) This post was paid for by the United States Army.
As an FYI, I was in the Army for 8 years and no I do not believe that the test is a valid measurement of ones intelligence or ability to be an effective police officer. But since this test is such a joke, if you can't score above a 70 (passing) you are too dumb ro be a civilian let alone a cop. I do believe that no one group of people should get TOTAL preferential treatment over another - it's discrimination. MA Civil Service is an absolute joke. No other state selects it's officers like MA does and no other state puts one group of people above another. At most they give vets 2 -5 extra points which is huge in a competitive exam like this. That's more then fair compensation.
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #27 ·
You know what it comes down to is that the Civil Service system is a bust. It handcuffs hiring departments and sets us all, no matter what preferential status you may or may not have, for disappointment. Scores are coming out soon, do they make a real difference? Good luck all. May the best candidate get the job(s).
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #28 ·
Hold on, I have a second language (fluent) that I listed on the exam. Is there another way to pursue getting on with the 2nd language? What kind of preferential treatment do paramedics get?
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #30 ·
ProudAmerican said:
Is the second language Spanish, Haitian/Cape Verdean Creole, Portuguese, Arabic, or Farsi? If not, you may still face an uphill battle. However being a paramedic can go a long way. Good luck and stay safe.
My 2nd language is Hebrew...Does EMT, as opposed to PERAMEDIC help?
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #42 ·
motivated said:
One of the many reasons I joined the Army is to get Vet status. All the people complaining have the oppurtunity to join and get the points. It is not unfair at all.
Get the point's (2 like state police) is one thing, TOTAL preferential treatment is another.
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #47 ·
USMCMP5811 said:
How do you figgure TOTAL? The preferance only helps a resident...... Case in point, I lived in a non-CS town for the last test(02) and even with my VET status, I'm still below some mental midget with residency. If it were TOTAL preference as your post implies, then Non resident Vet's would be on top of their 4 choices...... :sb:
I am reffering to the total preferantial treatment between all RESIDENTS of a city/town. Take 2 people with Boston residancy. A VET who scores an 85 and non-vet who scores 99. The vet with an 85 is above the none-vet with a 99. That's bull. Give the vet 2 -5 points and tell him/her to score better next time!
 

· Subscribing Member
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter · #54 ·
If you served in War/Combat, yes, you should be considered a for VET status (whether VETS should get TOTAL PREFERENTIAL treatment is another issue]. If you served on Active Duty but never got deployed, you are no more a VET the a reserviit who was in for 8 years with out being deployed. That's where I think it's bullshit!
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top