Feds accused of bullying state over police test |

Feds accused of bullying state over police test

The Associated Press

HARRISBURG — Pennsylvania has accused the federal government of browbeating it over the physical fitness tests administered to trooper candidates, insisting it remains committed to recruiting women into the state police force.

The state asked a federal judge in Harrisburg to throw out a lawsuit filed last summer by the Department of Justice. The lawsuit said the use of the fitness tests to screen and select applicants amounts to a pattern of employment discrimination and has illegally kept dozens of otherwise qualified women out of jobs.

The Pennsylvania State Police has made “strong affirmative efforts to recruit qualified women to join the trooper ranks … and will continue this commitment, independently of any hectoring by the United States through this or any other form of legal action,” the state said in a legal brief filed this week.

The government’s lawsuit said that nearly 100 percent of male recruits pass the initial physical readiness tests while about 70 percent of female recruits pass. About 5 percent of the department’s 4,700 sworn members are women.

The Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division argued that the different pass rates for men and women were evidence the tests had a disparate impact on women.

It seeks an order preventing the state police from engaging in discriminatory employment practices as well as back pay and other remedies for women who did not pass the test.

The state, in its response, denied there’s a gross statistical disparity between the pass rates for men and women, noting that under the federal government’s own standard the pass rate for women should be 80 percent of the pass rate for men.

The state said the government had no legal authority to bring the case.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.