UFA Head's Stance Not Racial

Five years ago, Steve Cassidy won election as president of the Uniformed Firefighters Association in part because he led the charge against a Fire Department plan for a commemorative statue showing the raising of a flag by three firefighters who were white, black and Latino.

Mr. Cassidy argued that this was a politically correct attempt to distort the reality that it was three white firefighters who had raised the flag at Ground Zero the day after the destruction of the World Trade Center.

His insistence that the statue be true to the facts, as we said at the time, missed the emotional reality behind the FDNY idea: that each ethnic group it sought to depict had suffered serious losses on 9/11 in proportion to its representation in the uniformed ranks. That should have mattered far more than staying true to what amounted to a moving photo opportunity - and not even an original concept, since it had been done before following the battle for Iwo Jima during World War II.

In that case, Mr. Cassidy engaged in racial politics. We do not believe, however, that he is guilty of such a practice - contrary to what was charged by an advocate for black firefighters - in supporting the Bloomberg administration's defense of the 1999 and 2002 exams for Firefighter.

The UFA led by Mr. Cassidy has sought to intervene in the case in which the U.S. Department of Justice is suing the city for holding exams it believes discriminated against minority candidates. The suit is not based on any inherent bias in the questions, but rather the fact that minorities did not perform as well as white candidates, with the discrepancy considered statistically significant.

Paul Washington, the former president of the FDNY Vulcan Society, a black fraternal group, said last week that Mr. Cassidy's stance was another case of his "playing racial politics." He cited as proof a letter from U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel recounting a meeting a year ago in which Mr. Cassidy was stated to have supported making future written exams pass/fail while holding more rigorous physical exams for Firefighter.

A spokesman for Mr. Cassidy did not dispute that account last week, which was somewhat surprising. Even if so, however, that would not make his position in defense of the 1999 and 2002 exams inconsistent.

Those hired as Firefighters as a result of their scores on those exams are UFA members, and it is Mr. Cassidy's duty to protect their interests. Any change in how those exams and lists are used - most probably through the upgrading of minority candidates, which could come with retroactive seniority - could have an impact on those already on the job. And a larger issue affecting the entire UFA membership is the possibility of the creation of quota hiring - something the union has historically opposed and that would be unpopular, to put it mildly, with the rank and file.

Mr. Cassidy realizes, as does the Fire Department, that the firefighting force should be more diversified than it presently is, with more than 90 percent of uniformed personnel white and 99 percent of it male. He has made constructive, practical suggestions about how to better integrate the ranks: besides placing more emphasis on the physical exam, he has called for stepped-up recruitment from the military.

Making that a priority, it would seem to us, would have the potential to bring more minorities and women into the job on their own capabilities, rather than being aided by a quota that would inevitably carry a stigma.

The Vulcans have argued that many questions on the past Firefighter exams were irrelevant or confusing. But the Justice Department lawsuit does not fault the tests for being insufficiently job-related; it merely takes issue with the results.

It is not insignificant that the FDNY Hispanic Society is at odds with the Vulcans about whether the tests were discriminatory. Its president, Fire Lieut. Miguel Ramos, told this newspaper that he didn't believe either exam cited in the lawsuit was unfair, noting, "I didn't have major complaints from my membership."

Civil service exams aren't perfect, but they have long been regarded as the most objective measure of a candidate's ability to perform a particular job.

There are those who believe too much emphasis is placed on the tests, and that strong on-the-job training can determine whether candidates who weren't top scorers have the aptitude to be capable.

More than 20 years ago, an attempt to increase minorities in the NYPD brought a simpler written test that one city personnel expert decried as something that a "functional illiterate" could pass. The Police Commissioner at the time, Ben Ward, brushed off that complaint, saying in his inimitable style that he had "worked with dumb cops all my life" and that those who really lacked the skills would eventually be weeded out.

But over the last dozen years, the NYPD has gone the other way, insisting that all candidates for the job have at least 60 college credits unless they are veterans of military service. Raising education standards has not hurt minority representation; in fact, each succeeding police class in recent years has had more minorities.

We believe Mr. Cassidy makes a valid point in his affidavit defending the city when he notes that the "extensive training on the use of sophisticated computerized equipment" makes it essential to have well-educated Firefighters who can perform well on a written test. There's nothing especially racial, or political, about that stance.