The City of Corpus Chrisi, Texas was faced with the threat of a lawsuit by the U.S. Department of Justice, Employment and Litigation Division. At issue was a long-standing debate over the city's physical fitness test for applicants. In response to an earlier inquiry by Justice about potential adverse impact, Corpus modified its standards. (How do you unilaterally modify standards if they've been validated?)
Question: We have a candidate requesting a reasonable accommodation; what are our obligations?
We got a call into the FF World HQ's recently from a training officer at a department. The department was going to be conducting applicant fitness testing and were notified by a potential candidate that she would be requesting a reasonable accommodation for the sit up test and the 1.5 mile run portions of the battery.
Physical Testing: Have Our Requirements Changed?
A colleague with knowledge of the in-house studies conducted by the FBI at the heart of Bauer shared the following with me in a recent conversation:
the test was validated to assess overall physical fitness as it pertains to the safe and effective performance of the Special Agent position. She (Dr. Grubb) also notes that a primary concern was to assess whether a NAT (National Academy Trainee) would be able to perform in a safe manner during their time at the Academy. In addition, the standards should be required to ensure safe performance as a Special Agent, and not just at the applicant or NAT level.
The Bauer Decision and Job-Relatedness
A central issue in Bauer is the physical fitness test and standards (PFT) required of National Academy Trainees (NAT's) which resulted from two studies conducted by an Industrial/Organizational Psychologist employed by the FBI. In its defense of the test, the FBI offered that the National Academy Training Program (NATP) is designed to ensure a NAT has attained the necessary proficiencies to perform the duties of a special agent
What are the takeaway points from the Bauer Decision? (Part 1)
Retention standards. There, I said it. If there is a topic more likely to divide the entire population related to law enforcement, and in this case the entire population is related to law enforcement, I'm not sure what it is.
Whenever the topic of my job comes up, the person on the other side of the conversation says something like, "Yeah. I was wondering about that: are there fitness requirements for officers on the job."
Is Bauer v Department of Justice, the Decision We've Been Waiting For?
Adaptations to Training: Part 2
Tests of muscular endurance, that is the ability to sustain a sub-maximal force, include the timed one-minute sit up test and the push up test. Muscular strength is the ability to generate high amounts or maximal force, typically one time. The bench press test measures the amount of force the upper body can generate in the bench press position.
Again, it is important to note that public safety officers generally will not perform these tasks in the line of duty; these test events represent valid field measures of the attributes of muscular strength and endurance.
Adaptations to Training: Part 1
In the process of performing our duties, we will, on demand, develop tests and standards. These physical readiness tests take one of two forms: physical fitness test battery or job-task simulation tests. (We develop both but don't charge extra for it!) One of the first questions we get during the out-brief is: "How many people will pass (or fail) the test?"