The civil rights movement may be moribund, but civil rights law still yields results. New York City, behaving like many of its citizens in claiming that it should not be found guilty of discrimination unless it can be proved that it intended to discriminate, loses the argument in federal court. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act lives.
Purposeful Discrimination in NYC Fire Department Hiring
A Black Agenda Radio commentary by Glen Ford
“The city knew the test was discriminatory, and failed to do anything about it.”
Guilty as charged. A federal judge last week ruled that New York City not only discriminated against Blacks attempting to join the Fire Department, but did so intentionally. According to longtime observers, that’s the first time in memory that New York City has been found guilty of intentional discrimination. Establishing guilt by a “pattern-and-practice” of deliberate discrimination is difficult, since it involves more than simply showing that discrimination occurred. It requires the defendant be shown to have known he was discriminating. The Center for Constitutional Law convinced the judge that, not only did the Fire Department's tests have a discriminatory effect on Black applicants, but that the city knew the test was discriminatory, and failed to do anything about it from 1999 to 2002. Mayor Michael Bloomberg was also named in the suit, along with the former fire commissioner. But both of them got off on a technicality. Although the judge believed there was “strong evidence” that the mayor and the commissioner had both been informed that the examinations were discriminatory, they were nevertheless entitled to “qualified immunity.” In a deposition, Mayor Bloomberg testified that he “did not recall” receiving a report spelling out the discriminatory impact of the firefighters' test.
“The test is similar to others used in big cities across the nation, with the same intent – to maintain the racial status quo.”
So, why was the test so difficult for Black applicants to pass? Many of the multiple choice questions involved arcane details on firefighting that only people that grew up around firefighters would know – a test put together by people in the overwhelmingly white firefighting culture who wanted to keep outsiders – out. The test is similar to others used in big cities across the nation, with the same intent – to maintain the racial status quo. The examination did not test whether an applicant would be a good firefighter. Instead, it tested whether an applicant was immersed in the trivia of firefighting culture. No wonder a bunch of Irish guys pass the test every year, and no wonder only 3.4 percent of the department is Black, in a city that is one quarter African American.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act holds that, if disproportionate numbers of Blacks and Hispanics fail a test, then it must be shown that the test actually measures the skills and knowledge necessary to do the job.
The suit was brought by three people who took the test, and by the Vulcan Society, an organization of Black firefighters. But the total pool of potential plaintiffs includes every applicant that failed to become a firefighter because of the test, and that could reach into the hundreds. The judge has not yet decided what the remedy should be, but civil rights lawyers say he could order that the city change its hiring policies, and that people who failed to get jobs because of the test be paid the salaries they lost.
New York City plans to appeal the judges ruling, claiming that, even if the test did have a discriminatory impact on Blacks, the city didn't intend for that to happen.
BAR executive editor Glen Ford can be contacted at Glen.Ford@BlackAgendaReport.com.
“The men at Attica were prepared to die for the democratic principles not only enunciated in their Manifesto, but experienced in their revolt…”
Eritrean Americans celebrated their 51st Eritrean Festival and their home country’s resolute independence from August 1 to 3, 2025.
History exposes the Fed's inflation fight for what it truly is: a decades-long class war waged against working people under the guise of monetary policy.
"There is no starvation" is the latest from BAR's Poet-in-Residence.
The U.S. climate movement claims to fight for change while systematically silencing radical action. This isn’t resistance. It’s controlled opposition dressed in green.
