Jay Bauer, a Northwestern University doctoral graduate and former University of Wisconsin assistant professor of Communications Science, has filed an interesting lawsuit alleging that females are given unfair advantage in training for special agents. Bauer fell one push-up short of making the cut for agent and was denied a second try that was afforded to female candidates (who are required to do less than half of the push ups).
Bauer is currently an intelligence analyst for the FBI in Chicago and passed a fitness test before entering new-agent training at Quantico, Va. He had done well at the academy — scoring at the top of his class in tests and was chosen by his fellow trainees to be their class leader. However, one fitness test required at least 38 situps in a minute and do 30 untimed push ups as well as running times. Bauer could only do 29 push ups and was forced to resign from special agent training. However, a female trainee who scored near the bottom of the class in firearms proficiency was given another attempt at the fitness test — an option given women rather than men. Moreover, while females are only required to do
14 untimed push ups — men are required to do 30. The lawsuit cites a study that shows that 14 female push ups are the equivalent to 27 to 29 for men.
I am not sure that the study is a big help when it is short one push up on the equivalent scale. Courts are reluctant to micromanage such tests and give a fair degree of deference. The requirement of a couple more push ups may not seem arbitrary and capricious.
The option of a second chance for females would seem a stronger claim. Why should females get a second chance but not males?
What do you think?
What would Jack Bauer do?
This is how he does discovery:
Source: Chicago Tribune
Excuse me if I don’t get overly exercised about a man being discriminated against. I was always told it made me a better person.
“Bauer could only do 29 push ups and was forced to resign from special agent training. However, a female trainee who scored near the bottom of the class in firearms proficiency was given another attempt at the fitness test — an option given women rather than men.”
Since the gal can’t hit the broadside of a barn, is she going to yell “stop and give me 29” to a fleeing suspect?
@Rafflaw: I do not think the standards for situps and push ups is unusual or outrageous for a young individual in a job that can be demanding.
If the job is demanding, why do women (typically 30% lighter than men) only have to do 14? Why are women allowed at all?
There should not be different standards for men and women, period.
If physical demands are part of the job, then giving women a lesser requirement than men means the men are in danger if they work with a women, because she cannot do the same physical work as a male partner. That is fundamentally unfair.
Whatever physicality is required to do the job, it should be the same for men and women. If it is to be personally weight based (as it certainly might logically be) then the requirements should be identical. For example, do ten pull ups, 14 push ups, climb a 20 foot rope, run up ten flights of stairs, run a seven minute mile.
If the argument is about the physicality necessary to do the job, I see no reason why gender should enter into the equation at all.
If Bauer is currently an intelligence analyst for the FBI then he is barred from appealing adverse FBI agency personnel decisions. Not sure this lawsuit is going anywhere.
FBI agents should be held to the same physical fitness standard achieved by J. Edgar Hoover on the last year of his job as Head. You can set aside his cross dressing skills.
I have to admit that given this guy was a professor, I’d canvas his past students and ask them if they think he should be given a make-up exam.
If he’s ever practiced in court, I’d ask his former clients if they got to have a make-up trial.
But if the FBI is regularly giving women do-overs that’s pretty clearly wrong.
In the Tribune article they say “[Bauer] scored at or near the top of his class in everything from firearms training to academics.”
They don’t actually provide a list, so there’s on telling how many things “everything” encompasses, but normally an athletic test is considered part of “everything” at the FBI academy.
This article has a serious slant to it. It provides Mr Bauer’s side of the story and nothing else.
Here are some questions I would like to hear the FBI’s answer to (missing from the article):
1: Why was the pushup requirement raised from 25 to 30 in 2003? Is this important?
2: Why was Mr Bauer denied a 2nd chance to take the athletic test? How was the decision made to deny that request, and by whom?
3: Were there other mitigating factors involved in this case?
4: Does the bureau have a pattern of discrimination against men who struggle with their fitness test? Disproportionately applied to men while lenient with women?
In addition to asking these questions, I would like to ask the Tribune reporter Steve Schmadeke:
1: Why mention that Mr Bauer relocated to Chicago with a wife and 2 kids? Don’t women relocate with their spouses and kids too?
2: Why mention the other athletic test elements without confirming the list is complete? Are you merely mentioning some of the other elements, or is this a full rundown of the athletic test?
3: In a separate paragraph, you [Schmadeke] say “Bauer allegedly fulfilled all the other requirements” but don’t indicate whether this is a generalized claim, or just referring to the athletic test. Which is it, and why is it merely alleged?
4: When mentioning the female trainee that was given a second chance at her athletic test, you claim she “scored near the bottom of the class” in firearms proficiency, but you don’t mention that score. Was it sufficient to pass the FBI requirements? Are we to infer that you believe she is less fit to serve as an agent than Mr Bauer? Why don’t you include her name in your article so that we can test your allegation by contacting her and hearing her side of the story?
Jill — It seems to me that Mr Bauer already has a job with the bureau, just one that doesn’t require him to do 30 pushups.
From the Tribune article it’s difficult to see what his real complaint is. His attorney mentions that a woman with poor shooting skills got a 2nd chance on her athletic test, but they don’t mention why. Could it be that an instructor went to bat for her, assuring superiors that she was deserving? Perhaps My Bauer’s instructors all felt he was not deserving.
Could it be that Mr Bauer’s real lawsuit is alleging that FBI training instructors ought to be stripped of their ability to apply their hard-earned judgment in training decisions? Or, perhaps his complaint is that they ALREADY HAVE been stripped of that ability, and thus could not give him a 2nd chance simply because the rules demand it. The story just doesn’t say.
“14 untimed push ups — men are required to do 30. The lawsuit cites a study that shows that 14 female push ups are the equivalent to 27 to 29 for men.”
Pretty much supported by what happens to women’s looks by age 30.
“Bette Noir
1, April 10, 2012 at 9:26 am
In the interest of full disclosure, I should reveal that my father was once enraged at being asked to step aside, after taking a civil service exam for a promotion, to allow the promotion of an African/American who had scored just outside the hiring range. Of course they didn’t want my dad in that position; besides being a raging alcoholic, he was a racist and a member of an assortment of extremist right-wing groups. Duh. Not someone you want managing a law enforcement division.”
Ha! Which Bette Noir then projects onto this other guy. Yeah, he must be a drunk like your daddy, that’s why. Got news for you Noir, we’ve read your father’s facebook page and yours, and he had a good reason for being drunk.
I think Neil makes a good analysis. There are some jobs, which rafflaw also points out, that do require one to be able to do certain activities. All men cannot qualify for these positions any more than all women can. If you need these skills to do your job, then you should demonstrate you are
able to perform them. This will rule out both many men and many women.
Here is an article on regulators who took on financial criminals. I doubt one of these people could do 5 sit ups but they could still kick some ass!!!
http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2012/04/bill-black-the-silver-anniversary-of-the-keating-five-meeting-citizens-uniteds-precursor.html
I agree that his stronger claim is the second chance issue. I do not think the standards for situps and push ups is unusual or outrageous for a young individual in a job that can be demanding.
As to Jill’s comments, I would agree that we need more feet on the ground investigating the Banksters, but I am not holding my breath.
The physical fitness stuff,especially where exaggeratedly stiff, does seem like a true anachronism, or something. Jill accurately notes the contradiction. Of course the Bureau probably already supposes they recruit only the “mentally sharp and ethically strong” already.
“The larger point remains that every agent working for the FBI does not need to be physically buff. They could really use people who were mentally sharp and ethically strong. These would be people of courage who would take on the powerful instead of turning on our population, spying on and harassing people for engaging in lawful activity.” -Jill
Completely agree.
DonS,
Ditto…. Jill yep…
I have always argued that males are discriminated against in law enforcement and the military. The physical fitness tests should be standardized for everyone according to the demands of the job being performed. Males are also discriminated against with regard to hair length in these two occupations. And Females are discriminated against in the military considering that certain MOS’s are actually closed to them altogether, such as infantry and artillery.
Why not put the agents who can’t do pushups on the case of massive financial fraud? There’s a real need for those kind of investigators! Not everyone has to be buff to do good! 🙂
Of course he should get two chances and I do believe there has been discrimination in this case.
The larger point remains that every agent working for the FBI does not need to be physically buff. They could really use people who were mentally sharp and ethically strong. These would be people of courage who would take on the powerful instead of turning on our population, spying on and harassing people for engaging in lawful activity.
In the interest of full disclosure, I should reveal that my father was once enraged at being asked to step aside, after taking a civil service exam for a promotion, to allow the promotion of an African/American who had scored just outside the hiring range. Of course they didn’t want my dad in that position; besides being a raging alcoholic, he was a racist and a member of an assortment of extremist right-wing groups. Duh. Not someone you want managing a law enforcement division.
Wrecking a man’s career over one push-up seems pretty harsh. I wonder whether there were other issues that made this man’s higher-ups eager to get rid of him.
“Why should females get a second chance but not males? ”
Uh, affirmative action? Minority recruitment to meet agency goals?