David Yaffe-Bellany file photo
Ex-fire union President Frank Ricci.
The following opinion essay was submitted by Frank Ricci, a retired former New Haven Fire Department drillmaster, union president, and battalion chief. Ricci is currently a Fellow of Labor for the Yankee Institute and an advisory board member for FDIC and Fire Engineering Magazine. He was also the lead plaintiff in the U.S. Supreme Court case Ricci v. DeStefano.
When trapped in a fire faced with blistering heat, blinding smoke and fear causing disorientation, you know help is only minutes away. As citizens we trust the fire department will be able to endeavor to mitigate any emergency and safeguard our most precious possessions including our children. But what if the firefighters didn’t have the strength or endurance to rescue you or your child?
Connecticut lawmakers, in a well-meaning yet ill-thought proposal would provide an alternative to the 50 pound vest requirement for female firefighter candidates. This vest is worn during a validated eight station timed test. Each of these stations mimic essential job functions that a firefighter is required to pass ensuring they have the strength and endurance to do the job.
House Bill 5501 may be “inclusive”, but the proponents forgot to include the facts. According to the New York Times, the basic firefighter gear weighs 59 pounds without tools. Depending on assignment at a fire, the weight of the gear and tools can go as high as 106 pounds.
Several news outlets spoke to career female firefighters that oppose this terrible policy change, and support the Candidate Physical Ability Test Program (CPAT).
The CPAT test is used throughout the nation. The test in Connecticut is administrated by the State under a license provided by the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) and The International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC). This means that no component of the test can be altered without violating the licenses and invalidating the test.
Meaning Connecticut taxpayers will be on the hook to develop a costly new test for females resulting in a feel good charade that certainly will become marred by costly litigation and place the public and fellow firefighters at risk.
Under this proposal, female candidates will enter the Fire Academy at a disadvantage and under a cloud of suspicion compared to male recruits who proved they can pull their own weight.
Firefighters who pass CPAT and maintain their functional fitness can be confident they will be able to successfully complete the Fire Academy without endangering themselves or other recruits and respond to a fire in your community.
This test has been in place for 27 years and has survived numerous court challenges. The most recent federal case, based in Madison, WI, once again codified that the CPAT overcomes any adverse impact meeting what the court refers to as business necessity. This means the test has been professionally developed, validated and is job related measuring the physical ability essential to preform the functions of a firefighter.
The test is even acknowledged by the Equal Employment and Opportunity Commission who entered into a Conciliation Agreement with the IAFF and the IAFC that is in the appendix of the CPAT manual. The EEOC rightfully focuses on mentorship, practice and coaching. Which should be available for all candidates.
While other departments have implemented quality programs, CT has been behind the curve due to the lack of an indoor facility that is licensed to administer the test. Sound public policy would dictate providing the necessary coaching and training components, not lowering the standards in the name of equity.
Equity has become the new code word for quotas, gimmicks and schemes designed to engineer a result without regard for merit or the individual. To be clear, firefighters do not rise to meet your expectations based of immutable characteristics they fall to the level of their strength, training, endurance, and functional fitness.
Public safety must transcend politics and be merit based. It is clear state legislators were sold a bill of goods without all the information or considering the true cost to taxpayers. It is also unfortunate that poorly purposed public policy not only endangers residents, it also has significant finical implications on the taxpayers.
As I understand it, the reason that they wanted to change the CPAT requirements was it was difficult to find the facilities with easily accessed hours of operation around CT to prepare for it. But the solution is not to change the CPAT, but to create a facility with longer hours that potential firefighters can more easily access training. Increasing equity should not be about lowering standards, but increasing access to preparation and training.