New Haven decision
Supreme Court sets back affirmative action
By
John Catalinotto
Published Jul 8, 2009 5:29 PM
Consider this test question that measures sports knowledge among a group of
people 70 years of age and older who claim to be baseball fans:
“Who was the best professional right-handed pitcher between 1930 and
1955?”
Those completely focused on major league baseball might answer, “Bob
Feller.”
Those who know something about the “Negro League”—racism kept
African Americans out of MLB until 1947—would probably answer,
“Satchel Paige.”*
What’s the right answer? The answer is that it’s hard to make a
test that has no cultural bias, even when that is the goal.
That’s what the city of New Haven, Conn., discovered in 2003 when it
assigned a multiple-choice test as part of the criteria for promoting
firefighters to officer positions. Though some of New Haven’s
African-American firefighters passed the test, none scored high enough to be
promoted. Nineteen white firefighters and one Latino qualified for
promotion.
There were obviously African-American firefighters in New Haven who would be
capable supervisors. Following the guidelines for affirmative action indicated
by the 1964 Civil Rights Act and later decisions on achieving increased
equality, the city of New Haven’s authorities decided—quite
reasonably—that the problem was with the test.
This meant that the written/oral test excluded Black supervisors and would
thereby reinforce the weight of 400 years of slavery, 138 additional years of
oppression and discrimination, and the current load of institutionalized
racism. A test that excludes in this way is illegal. It creates additional
problems for a city whose population is 60 percent Black and/or Latina/o. The
city decided to postpone the promotions until they found a more nearly unbiased
test.
Unfortunately for working-class solidarity, the 19 white firefighters and one
Latino sued for the promotions. A lower court—in which Barack
Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor took part—approved
the city’s decision. But in late June the U.S. Supreme Court by a 5-4
vote reversed the lower court and decided the promotions should go through. The
usual arch-reactionary justices made up the majority.
A complete overhaul of the educational, court, prison, economic and social
structure is needed to eradicate all forms of racist inequality. Affirmative
action, while only a small remedy to confront the vast weight of institutional
racism that still exists throughout U.S. society, is still better than nothing.
The court’s decision should be reversed as soon as
possible—reversed in the streets and in the next decision by the
court.
It is likely that the 20 firefighters who took part in the suit, plus the Black
firefighters, are all qualified for promotion. A multiple-choice test is a
questionable measure of the ability to make emergency split-second decisions of
how to deploy forces while a building is burning or how well the
“troops” will respond to a command.
The 20 who sued celebrated the court decision and their promotions. One can
easily see that they wanted, and believed they were entitled to, an increase in
pay, respect and whatever other benefits go with a promotion. But it is a
short-sighted celebration. By damaging affirmative action, the decision makes
it harder to build the kind of solidarity with the African-American
firefighters and with the community in general that is needed to advance the
struggle of all firefighters and the community they serve.
If, faced with a tight budget, New Haven tries to cut Fire Department funding
and firefighters’ salaries and benefits, real solidarity among Black,
white and Latina/os will be needed to defend workers’ interests.
Beyond New Haven, it is right and just for every worker to defend affirmative
action, whatever its limitations. That means it is also in white workers’
interests to defend affirmative action. Only that way can the working class,
made up of all nationalities, build the solidarity needed for a successful,
united struggle that will provide jobs for all at a decent wage and respect for
all working people in general.
The best struggles will aim for advances for all workers while eliminating
inequalities among them.
This court decision has an additional wrinkle because of Sotomayor’s
role. The racist right-wing gang who attack her for everything progressive she
has done and for her Puerto Rican background also calls her
“biased” in this case. What nonsense! What Sotomayor did in this
case was make a defensible legal decision that left affirmative action
standing. (See editorial on Sotomayor’s nomination at workers.org, posted
June 3.)
*Feller was an outstanding MLB pitcher who also led all-star teams in
exhibition games against Paige’s African-American all-stars. Paige was a
living legend—who would have preferred an MLB salary. A very popular MLB
star hitter of that epoch, Joe Dimaggio, faced Paige once in a 1936 exhibition
game and was overjoyed to get one single in four at-bats against him.
“After I got that hit off Satchel,” said Dimaggio, “I knew I
was ready for the big leagues.” (Baseball Almanac)
E-mail: [email protected]
Articles copyright 1995-2012 Workers World.
Verbatim copying and distribution of this entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email:
[email protected]
Subscribe
[email protected]
Support independent news
DONATE