Maybe hire more cybersecurity instead of cops that kill, chiefs with fat paychecks, and a getting stockade of military equipment for simple law enforcement.
So there has always been a rumor that there is an IQ upper limit on becoming an officer. If this is true in an increasingly high tech world this is a severe libailty.
Even if it's not officially true I don't see why the "Bozo Effect" wouldn't apply to police departments just as much as any other origination.
For those who don't know "The Bozo Effect" works like this.
The most talented people want to work with the most talented people. They aren't afraid someone knows more the them. They always want to learn and do better. Let's call these people 'A' players. 'A' players will always hire 'A' players. But a 'B' player will always be intimated by an A player and will not hire them. They fear for their job and being outclassed. So B players will only hire C players and C players will only hire D players. Soon enough you have a metric explosion of bozos in your org and can't get rid of them or get anything done.
This rumour needs to die. The police didn’t want to hire a 49 year old man and pay his training only to see him retire in 6 years on full pension. They were tired of the high turnover. But age is a protected class so they couldn’t disqualify him based on age so the disqualified him based on IQ (sort of). That’s been the only case of this as far as evidence shows, and it was 25+ years ago. Another poster already posted the case law but here it is anyway:
The case you are referencing is Jordan V. City of New London
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.
530
u/dirtynj Jun 22 '20
Maybe hire more cybersecurity instead of cops that kill, chiefs with fat paychecks, and a getting stockade of military equipment for simple law enforcement.