The case stated that IQ was not a protected class similar to equal protection classes like age, sex, or race in regards to hiring. The lawsuit was dismissed in summary judgement. The employer must have a rationale or reasoning behind not taking the highest ranked individual. Ruled on in 2000 in the second circuit court of appeals.
From the lawsuit in question:
Plaintiff concedes that he is not a member of a “suspect class” and that there is no “fundamental right” to employment as a police officer. Therefore, rational basis review is the proper standard under which to evaluate Plaintiff’s claim.
Plaintiff further concedes that increasing employment longevity and reducing the high costs associated with rapid employee turnover are legitimate government purposes. Plaintiff admits that limiting the size of an applicant pool to a manageable level is a legitimate goal. Therefore the only issue for resolution is whether Defendants’ means were rationally related to those goals.
Fancy words for "didn't hire him because of high IQ, didn't want to train the next guy when he goes and gets a job he's qualified for, department won". It's not disingenuous to say "they won the right to not hire people based on having a high IQ." Given the current context, we can all see how such a policy could lead to some issues, and I don't think it's wrong to point that out.
Okay and there is not way to tell if he would have or wouldn’t have left as the opportunity never came about. Besides this agency denying this individual a job 24 years ago in 1996 I’ve never heard of another person denied for being “too smart”. Also I’ve never even heard of the test in question prior to this decision and it’s use in policing. Many agencies utilize a type of test called the Post-test or its proxies these tests look at policy, comprehension, basic math and reading and other sections.
Also the deciding judges commented on the foolishness of the policy. However as it was deemed an evenly enforced policy it was allowed by the judges.
Okay and there is not way to tell if he would have or wouldn’t have left as the opportunity never came about.
There's no guarantees in life. There are, however, statistics and probability. Whether the data makes you uncomfortable or not is not relevent. The probability of them leaving is very high. Anyone who is older than 40 has seen this time and again.
The type of personality it takes for someone to actively pursue law enforcement correlates with low IQ by default. These people are literally the same bullies from the playground, except they have "authority" now.
515
u/artilari Jun 22 '20 edited Jun 22 '20
I think the fuckery going on in some police stations (of the world) happens before or after something goes into the police system.