# Court OKs barring people with high IQs from becoming cops



## Makalakumu (Jan 2, 2012)

http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=95836&page=1#.TwF3HYHNnoh



> A man whose bid to become a police officer was rejected after he scored  too high on an intelligence test has lost an appeal in his federal  lawsuit against the city.
> 
> 
> The 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in New York upheld a lower courts  decision that the city did not discriminate against Robert Jordan  because the same standards were applied to everyone who took the test.
> ...



This is a really bad idea.  How common it is for various precincts to do this?


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 2, 2012)

Actually it's a good idea! having a high IQ is often an indicator of having no common sense! I watched a programme recently about a graduate with, yes a high IQ who joined the fire service here, the trainees did an exercise at a factory that was on fire. they went through the motions of fighting the fire in the way they'd been taught but he was standing by so he was asked by the instructor what he was doing, he replied he was working out the way the fire would burn through the building, taking into account all the factors including the wind 'swirl' between building, how and where the fire started etc etc. It was very good academically, theinstructor asked him if he'd made sure any occupants were out and accounted for, he looked at him in horror, it hadn't occurred to him to be that practical! He stayed in the fire service but as a very good investigator not a fireman.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 2, 2012)

So thats why I was hired so quickly.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 2, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=95836&page=1#.TwF3HYHNnoh
> 
> This is a really bad idea.  How common it is for various precincts to do this?



No idea.  But the agency I used to work for required all sworn officers to have a four-year degree.  Didn't matter what the degree was in.  I always thought that was a good thing.  However, barring illegal discrimination against a protected class (and 'smart' isn't one), governments are free to set their own standards.


----------



## billc (Jan 2, 2012)

I would think that you are narrowing down your pool of good candidates unnecesarily.  In the case that Tez sites, that kind of bad judgement could be ruled out in training.  there are other really smart people who would do the exact opposite of that guy.  A persons ability to make good decisions can only be seen in the testing, training and probationary period of the recruit.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 2, 2012)

billcihak said:


> I would think that you are narrowing down your pool of good candidates unnecesarily.  In the case that Tez sites, that kind of bad judgement could be ruled out in training.  there are other really smart people who would do the exact opposite of that guy.  A persons ability to make good decisions can only be seen in the testing, training and probationary period of the recruit.



Problem is with most department by the time the applicant reaches the academy or passes and get to the probationary period they have invested so much money and time they are reluctant to fire anyone.  Ive seen some really really poor recruits get passed thru the academy even when the academy staff has said they should be fired.  I am also a Field training officer and have failed a probationary officer and said they should be fired for serous anger issues, as well as a total lack of common sense only to have him given to other Field training officers and told they WILL pass this time.  That only happened to me onceand I was right about 16 months later he was fired and the city lost a lot of money when he slammed a tourist into a large plate glass window shattering the window and severly cutting the tourist on his face arms chest and legs.  I left that department shortly after that happened.   Im sure not all departments are like this but after spending 1000's of dollars and almost a year of background checks and academy training departments have a hard time letting people go.

I personally believe departments need to up the standards for hiring but sadly they are lowering them esp physical fitness and drug use standards.  The NAACP is trying to get my state to raise the number of times you are allow to try drugs because they said the current standards of 0 uses for cocaine, heroin, LSD, PCP, and  5 Marijuana uses in a lifetime with none in last 5 years were not fair to inner city black men.


----------



## elder999 (Jan 2, 2012)

Tez3 said:


> Actually it's a good idea! having a high IQ is often an indicator of having no common sense!.




No, Irene. _Having no common sense _is an indicator of having no common sense!

Having a high IQ is an indicator of taking IQ tests well.



ballen0351 said:


> I personally believe departments need to up the standards for hiring but sadly they are lowering them esp physical fitness and drug use standards. The NAACP is trying to get my state to raise the number of times you are allow to try drugs because they said* the current standards of 0 uses for cocaine, heroin, LSD, PCP, and 5 Marijuana uses in a lifetime with none in last 5 years were not fair to inner city black men*.



Those standards are much more stringent than the current guidelines for qualifying for a federal top secret clearance.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 2, 2012)

elder999 said:


> No, Irene. _Having no common sense _is an indicator of having no common sense!
> 
> Having a high IQ is an indicator of taking IQ tests well.
> 
> ...



True enough, however you can learn to take IQ tests so does that mean you have a high IQ if you can learn to take them?


----------



## granfire (Jan 2, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> No idea.  But the agency I used to work for required all sworn officers to have a four-year degree.  Didn't matter what the degree was in.  I always thought that was a good thing.  However, barring illegal discrimination against a protected class (and 'smart' isn't one), governments are free to set their own standards.



Well, it might not yet be acceptable to discriminate against smart people (or ever, since there always will be more dumb ones...) current effords really do seem to aim at making that segment of the population an endangered species...(no child left behind my ****)


----------



## MJS (Jan 2, 2012)

Some PDs here in CT require a college degree, others do not.  I think that one of the reasons why something like this happens, is because the higher ups feel that if someone is that smart, they may be bored with the typical day to day work of a LEO.  IMO, I'd rather have someone with some good smarts, instead of a dummy.  This isn't to say that they have to have a 4yr degree or be some mega brain, but they should have some good solid common sense.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 2, 2012)

Makalakumu said:


> http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=95836&page=1#.TwF3HYHNnoh
> 
> 
> 
> This is a really bad idea.  How common it is for various precincts to do this?



It's not.  I'm not aware any other department with a maximum score on an equivalent test.  In fact, most that I'm aware don't use a full IQ test.  Psych tests are generally tools to hopefully screen out or at least inform the candidate about things that could be problems.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 2, 2012)

jks9199 said:


> It's not.  I'm not aware any other department with a maximum score on an equivalent test.  In fact, most that I'm aware don't use a full IQ test.  Psych tests are generally tools to hopefully screen out or at least inform the candidate about things that could be problems.



That's good to know.  I'd hate to see this become a widespread precedent.  Imagine filling the streets with armed people smart enough to follow directions and incurious enough to not ask questions.


----------



## Makalakumu (Jan 2, 2012)

ballen0351 said:


> So thats why I was hired so quickly.



:bangahead:


----------



## David43515 (Jan 3, 2012)

elder999 said:


> No, Irene. _Having no common sense _is an indicator of having no common sense!
> 
> Having a high IQ is an indicator of taking IQ tests well.
> 
> ...



So what does it say about me that I`ve never tried any of those things? ( I know, I`m boring....Actually I`ve just always been a slightly paranoid self-control freak.)


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2012)

elder999 said:


> Those standards are much more stringent than the current guidelines for qualifying for a federal top secret clearance.



We also give officers guns and allow them to take a life, let them roam the streets freely with little to no supervision with the power to detain and arrest a person.  I think standards should be higher then some paper pusher in an office that gets to see documents that some other paper pusher has decided were "TOP SECRET."  There already are enough "bad" cops out there why lower the standards?


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 3, 2012)

MJS said:


> Some PDs here in CT require a college degree, others do not.  I think that one of the reasons why something like this happens, is because the higher ups feel that if someone is that smart, they may be bored with the typical day to day work of a LEO.  IMO, I'd rather have someone with some good smarts, instead of a dummy.  This isn't to say that they have to have a 4yr degree or be some mega brain, but they should have some good solid common sense.



A four year degree doesn't just mean a certain level of intellect or even education; it can also mean they can do something for four years without quitting.  That may not sound like much, but not everyone, regardless of intelligence, can do it.  Same for prior military; it is often considered a benefit because the veteran is a known quantity; he or she can take orders, understands discipline, and can make a commitment and stick to it.

Consider that in many states, the local PD has to bear the cost of state peace officer certification.  That can cost upwards of $50,000 per officer.   A small town with a few dozen police officers (or even fewer) can ill afford to hire someone, have them complete certification at the state-run academy, and then bail for a bigger PD down the road that pays more.

It's not the same everywhere.  When I was working in LE in Colorado, we had recruiters come up from Houston PD.  Basically if you had 98.6 degrees F and no felony convictions, they'd hire you that day and you'd be wearing a Houston PD badge in a month.  Of course, it was also a good way to get killed in those days.  I heard Metro-Dade was similar; they'd hire anyone, but they were basically cannon-fodder during the Miami drug wars.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 3, 2012)

A reasonable educational standard of course is important for polcie officers but there's far more to the job than being able to write reports and to string a decent sentence together, a high/low IQ doesn't tell you about a person's moral values or their courage for example. It can't tell you if they are racist or they have compassion, that they take a job seriously or just doing it for the money, whether they can get on with people or work in a team, whether they have any commonsense or gumption, There's so many things it doesn't tell you so I'd say a good standard of education as a start but use other means ie interviews, tests of physical and leadership skills and command tasks. These will tell you more about candidates than an IQ test ever will.


----------



## MJS (Jan 3, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> A four year degree doesn't just mean a certain level of intellect or even education; it can also mean they can do something for four years without quitting. That may not sound like much, but not everyone, regardless of intelligence, can do it. Same for prior military; it is often considered a benefit because the veteran is a known quantity; he or she can take orders, understands discipline, and can make a commitment and stick to it.
> 
> Consider that in many states, the local PD has to bear the cost of state peace officer certification. That can cost upwards of $50,000 per officer. A small town with a few dozen police officers (or even fewer) can ill afford to hire someone, have them complete certification at the state-run academy, and then bail for a bigger PD down the road that pays more.
> 
> It's not the same everywhere. When I was working in LE in Colorado, we had recruiters come up from Houston PD. Basically if you had 98.6 degrees F and no felony convictions, they'd hire you that day and you'd be wearing a Houston PD badge in a month. Of course, it was also a good way to get killed in those days. I heard Metro-Dade was similar; they'd hire anyone, but they were basically cannon-fodder during the Miami drug wars.



Good points Bill.  I was simply saying that there are people out there that are more than capable of doing a great job, but don't have that college degree.  OTOH, like I said, I'd be willing to bet that the main reason they don't hire people that're overly smart, is out of fear they'll get bored with the typical police work, and leave, which leaves the dept. in a lurch after spending the time/money to hire and train the person.  Then again, nothing says they have to stay at that job for 20yrs.  Get your foot in the door, and who knows....perhaps a promotion, ie: Sgt. or perhaps a LE job on the Federal level.  

Then again, the 'paper' doesn't ensure the person you hire will always work out.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 3, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Consider that in many states, the local PD has to bear the cost of state peace officer certification. That can cost upwards of $50,000 per officer. A small town with a few dozen police officers (or even fewer) can ill afford to hire someone, have them complete certification at the state-run academy, and then bail for a bigger PD down the road that pays more.


Most smaller departments now require you to sign a contract if they send you to an academy.  My first department required me to sign a 4 year contract.  When I quit after 2 I had my next department pick up the contract and I signed a new 2 year contract with them.


----------



## jks9199 (Jan 3, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> A four year degree doesn't just mean a certain level of intellect or even education; it can also mean they can do something for four years without quitting.  That may not sound like much, but not everyone, regardless of intelligence, can do it.  Same for prior military; it is often considered a benefit because the veteran is a known quantity; he or she can take orders, understands discipline, and can make a commitment and stick to it.
> 
> Consider that in many states, the local PD has to bear the cost of state peace officer certification.  That can cost upwards of $50,000 per officer.   A small town with a few dozen police officers (or even fewer) can ill afford to hire someone, have them complete certification at the state-run academy, and then bail for a bigger PD down the road that pays more.
> 
> It's not the same everywhere.  When I was working in LE in Colorado, we had recruiters come up from Houston PD.  Basically if you had 98.6 degrees F and no felony convictions, they'd hire you that day and you'd be wearing a Houston PD badge in a month.  Of course, it was also a good way to get killed in those days.  I heard Metro-Dade was similar; they'd hire anyone, but they were basically cannon-fodder during the Miami drug wars.



Where I work, a newly hired officer starts at full pay and benefits during the academy.  That's 6 months, or about $22000, salary alone.  Add benefits and I'd put it somewhere around $30000 total wage costs alone.  (That's not considering if they were hired several weeks or months before the academy, which does happen depending their job situation when hired.)  Background and hiring process is going to add to those costs; around 8 to 12 hours of a detective sergeant's time for a fairly straightforward candidate, time for HR people involved in the testing and making the list, costs for psych and polygraph exams, medical exams, uniforms and gear, and I'd figure you can probably say that hiring a cop costs $50000 or more for my agency.  And I haven't really figured FTO costs (3 months or so where two cops are doing the work of one...)

With that in mind, I'd say that most agencies do their level best as a rule to hire good candidates who are going to work out for the department.  The chief in New London has decided that people who are too smart won't work out well.  OK.  His call, and the court has said it's OK.  I don't agree with him, though I can see the court's reasoning.  I think anyone, smart or dumb, can get bored sitting in a cruiser.  I fault the officer, not the agency.  Do the homework, find out what real police work is like, and have realistic expectations.  Then -- be creative, and boredom can be solved.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 3, 2012)

Ultimately, we also have to think about what we want our society to be like.

The concept of a meritocracy is that the most capable are the ones chosen; for anything.  This leads to businesses, government agencies, and even voters choosing those they think most capable (and that standard can be anything, such as physical ability or education or rated intelligence or aptitude at certain skills, like languages).

The military, to a large extent, is a meritocracy.  Although there are exceptions and failures, by and large, those most capable are recruited and promoted.

However, this leaves aside any notion of correcting issues that we as a society see as inherently unfair.  The first efforts in this regard were to address historical injustices, mostly involving race.

However, it wasn't long before we expanded the definition of what a protected class was and should be, those who should not be subjected to the entire rigors of the merit system, which was assumed to be biased at this point.  These were attempts to manually un-bias the system.

Now we have race, sex, gender identity, age, weight, and physical disability as protected classes to a greater or lesser extent; trumping merit in some cases (not all).  However, the demands for fair treatment do not contract; they only expand.  Are we to add the physically unattractive?  Surely they do not get the same fair treatment as those who are more pleasant to look at.  The smart?  The dumb?  Those who cannot read or write?  Everyone laughs and says _"That's a slippery slope, that will never happen"_ when I suggest such things, but year by year, we add to the list of people and groups who cannot be discriminated against by the evil sword of merit and the prejudices of employers.

There can be only one end-game to this.  We reach the point where it will not be legal to turn down any applicant for any job.  It will not matter; we'll have to hire blind people to drive buses if they want to, deaf people to be police dispatchers, overweight people in their 60's to be NFL players, and so on.  It will all be utterly fair - and nothing will work.

As a very smart person, I'd hate to be discriminated against because I am otherwise-qualified for a job I wanted but 'too smart' for it. On the other hand, I'll get by.  I can always play dumb; turnabout doesn't work.


----------



## granfire (Jan 3, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> Ultimately, we also have to think about what we want our society to be like.
> 
> The concept of a meritocracy is that the most capable are the ones chosen; for anything.  This leads to businesses, government agencies, and even voters choosing those they think most capable (and that standard can be anything, such as physical ability or education or rated intelligence or aptitude at certain skills, like languages).
> 
> ...





It's Barney's fault


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 4, 2012)

In Michigan, it is a* requirement *to become a certified LEO to have a college degree at least at the Associate Degree level.  Most accomplish this while attending a 2 year college that has a law enforcement program.  You take your general studies for about a year and then the second year is usually all law enforcement based.  If you already possess a degree of any kind, then you have to complete the MCOLES core classes.  This doe not include the initial testing to get into the MCOLES "Tracking Program", which includes a written test, a drug screen, complete background check/fingerprints/certified driving record, physical examination (vision/hearing).  Nor does it inclue the physical test or post-written test.

That being said, I have heard of other people in many various positions being turned down for jobs because they were over qualified and the employer felt that they would get bored within a year or two and move on.  This situation is not unique and is a judgement call by the employer and this story is an overblown headline of what was actually going on.


----------



## billc (Jan 4, 2012)

Here is a new concept...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jan/1/eeoc-high-school-diploma-might-violate-americans-w/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS



> Employers are facing more uncertainty in the wake of a letter from the





> Equal Employment Opportunity Commission warning them that requiring a high school diploma from a job applicant might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act.


----------



## granfire (Jan 4, 2012)

punisher73 said:


> That being said, I have heard of other people in many various positions being turned down for jobs because they were over qualified and the employer felt that they would get bored within a year or two and move on.  This situation is not unique and is a judgement call by the employer and this story is an overblown headline of what was actually going on.



You probably can't get a crumby job at Walmart putting down college experience....or much past a HS diploma.


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 4, 2012)

granfire said:


> You probably can't get a crumby job at Walmart putting down college experience....or much past a HS diploma.



that's probably true as well.  The people I knew had master's degree's in something that wasn't necessarily in the same field and the job only called for a bachelor's and held a higher paying/responsibility position previously.  The interviewer was concerned that they would get bored with the job since it wasn't challenging.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Jan 4, 2012)

punisher73 said:


> that's probably true as well.  The people I knew had master's degree's in something that wasn't necessarily in the same field and the job only called for a bachelor's and held a higher paying/responsibility position previously.  The interviewer was concerned that they would get bored with the job since it wasn't challenging.



I had a hard time landing a minimum-wage job as a security guard when I was between IT jobs in Wisconsin in the mid 1990's.  I had my degree in computer science and hadn't worked in LE for a long time at that point.  The HR manager said that from my ability to speak proper English and even my 'neat penmanship', she was convinced I would not stick around very long.  I convinced her to hire me.  Six weeks later, I found an IT job and I was gone.  So there you go.  Hey, at least I gave two week's notice.  Which sucked; the pay barely paid for my gas to get to work.


----------



## punisher73 (Jan 4, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I had a hard time landing a minimum-wage job as a security guard when I was between IT jobs in Wisconsin in the mid 1990's. I had my degree in computer science and hadn't worked in LE for a long time at that point. The HR manager said that from my ability to speak proper English and even my 'neat penmanship', she was convinced I would not stick around very long. I convinced her to hire me. Six weeks later, I found an IT job and I was gone. So there you go. Hey, at least I gave two week's notice. Which sucked; the pay barely paid for my gas to get to work.



thanks for the example.  That was exactly the type of thing I was trying to get at.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Jan 4, 2012)

*Do not lower standards*.  Not for LEO's, Doctor's, Nurses, Fireman or for a system practicing and teaching a Martial Science.  I personally believe we need to excel and have the cream rise to the top so to speak in any field.


----------



## Carol (Jan 4, 2012)

Bill Mattocks said:


> I had a hard time landing *a minimum-wage job *as a security guard when I was between IT jobs in Wisconsin in the mid 1990's.  I had my degree in computer science and hadn't worked in LE for a long time at that point.  The HR manager said that from my ability to speak proper English and even my 'neat penmanship', she was convinced I would not stick around very long.  I convinced her to hire me.  Six weeks later, I found an IT job and I was gone.  So there you go.  Hey, at least I gave two week's notice.  Which sucked; the pay barely paid for my gas to get to work.



But that was for a minimum wage job.  Not a job that averages $150,000 per year, and can exceed $250,000 per year.

http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/3961
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/05/06/police_pay_can_exceed_250k/


----------



## granfire (Jan 4, 2012)

Carol said:


> But that was for a minimum wage job.  Not a job that averages $150,000 per year, and can exceed $250,000 per year.
> 
> http://www.tollroadsnews.com/node/3961
> http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2010/05/06/police_pay_can_exceed_250k/




True...
However, if you find yourself in the situation that you have bills to pay but no money to do so, even the minimum wage job will be very welcome.


I know I never got a call back from Walmart and my 'college' carrier was less than stellar. A friend of mine had similar problems...just, she needed the money to put food on the table.


----------



## Josh Oakley (Jan 5, 2012)

125 isn't even that high. Also, from what I understand, there are a number of problems with IQ tests and reliability.


----------



## Carol (Jan 5, 2012)

granfire said:


> True...
> However, if you find yourself in the situation that you have bills to pay but no money to do so, even the minimum wage job will be very welcome.
> 
> 
> I know I never got a call back from Walmart and my 'college' carrier was less than stellar. A friend of mine had similar problems...just, she needed the money to put food on the table.



No doubt.  Been in the same position myself when I was in need of a survival job.   

There is definitely an element of control present.  The test the gentleman took was called the Wonderlic test.  Apparently the NFL -- also a hierarchical organization -- uses the same test for incoming players.  There definitely appears to be a aspect of control, Wiki had this quote:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonderlic_Test



> ...scoring too high can be as much of a problem as scoring too low.  Football coaches want to command the locker room. Being smarter than the  individual players makes that easier. Having a guy in the locker room  who may be smarter than every member of the coaching staff can be viewed  as a problem &#8212; or at a minimum as a threat to the egos of the men who  hope to be able when necessary to outsmart the players, especially when  trying in some way to manipulate them.


----------

