I am a electrical lineman, the last 15 years our company has hired about 20 women for the apprenticeship program and only one has been able to complete it. The one test they almost never pass is called "hurt man rescue," you have to climb a 50ft pole, tie a rope around a 200lb dummy, cut his leather safety strap with one hand while the other hand is holding the rope supporting his weight, and then lower him to the ground, without dropping him or letting him slam the ground in under 4 minutes. Since it is OSHA mandated the company cannot change the parameters of the test, that must be successfully completed every year.

I am a electrical lineman, the last 15 years our company has hired about 20 women for the apprenticeship program and only one has been able to complete it. The one test they almost never pass is called "hurt man rescue," you have to climb a 50ft pole, tie a rope around a 200lb dummy, cut his leather safety strap with one hand while the other hand is holding the rope supporting his weight, and then lower him to the ground, without dropping him or letting him slam the ground in under 4 minutes. Since it is OSHA mandated the company cannot change the parameters of the test, that must be successfully completed every year.

 

In other words we all need to cross our fingers OSHA doesn't fall victim to any political correctness.

I am a electrical lineman, the last 15 years our company has hired about 20 women for the apprenticeship program and only one has been able to complete it. The one test they almost never pass is called "hurt man rescue," you have to climb a 50ft pole, tie a rope around a 200lb dummy, cut his leather safety strap with one hand while the other hand is holding the rope supporting his weight, and then lower him to the ground, without dropping him or letting him slam the ground in under 4 minutes. Since it is OSHA mandated the company cannot change the parameters of the test, that must be successfully completed every year.

 

On a side topic, why does your company waste all that money training a group of people that has a 95% failure rate?

 

I am less opposed to women in law enforcement as long as they are physically able to perform at the same level as a man. Even though it's a dangerous job, I don't equate it to the military who are fighting a more barbaric enemy than what Joe Cop runs across on his job.

 

On that note, one of my pet peeves is out of shape police officers (along with fire personnel, coaches, athletic directors and trainers). It absolutely drives me crazy to see an overweight cop drive up to any scene and have to pull himself out of his cruiser. They should be in at least some form of good physical condition.

 

Cincinnati is getting ready to promote a guy to chief who looks like he ate the last chief!

 

My guess is your average Joe cop, especially ones in bigger cities, will see more action/danger on a daily basis than most people in the military. We're not always at war, but police always have to arrest people who are unwilling to go to jail.

On a side topic, why does your company waste all that money training a group of people that has a 95% failure rate?

 

Because you can't just refuse to hire someone based on sex alone. You have to put them through the process and show cause that they could not do the job they were hired for.

On a side topic, why does your company waste all that money training a group of people that has a 95% failure rate?

The "D" word.....diversity....

And we have asked the same question? They lowered the initial score for the physical assessment to hire in, so it doesn't surprise anyone that they struggle with the requirement.

Luckily, they are not allowed to alter the OSHA test or there would be separate standards for men and women, like there are in other professions. Probably a matter of time though, before they get around the standard.

Because you can't just refuse to hire someone based on sex alone. You have to put them through the process and show cause that they could not do the job they were hired for.

 

Thus our electric costs go up.

 

His company should pretest to screen out anyone that can't pass the OSHA requirements instead of hiring them first.

 

This sounds like more political correctness to me.

The "D" word.....diversity....

And we have asked the same question? They lowered the initial score for the physical assessment to hire in, so it doesn't surprise anyone that they struggle with the requirement.

Luckily, they are not allowed to alter the OSHA test or there would be separate standards for men and women, like there are in other professions. Probably a matter of time though, before they get around the standard.

 

You say diversity (I understand it isn't you DD) and I say pass through cost.

My guess is your average Joe cop, especially ones in bigger cities, will see more action/danger on a daily basis than most people in the military. We're not always at war, but police always have to arrest people who are unwilling to go to jail.

 

Really good point HB20. Like you, I think I could successfully argue that this is a bigger issue for police officers (who work alone most of the time) vs. the military.

 

I was told once by someone in charge "We either hire these women and make the best of it or the Federal Government comes in and..."

Delete

Really good point HB20. Like you, I think I could successfully argue that this is a bigger issue for police officers (who work alone most of the time) vs. the military.

 

I was told once by someone in charge "We either hire these women and make the best of it or the Federal Government comes in and..."

 

We are talking semantics, but a front line soldier or special forces is going to be in much more danger than a cop with his regular duties. I respect both professions and both come with life threatening risk. But the military during times of combat is a different level.

 

In times of peace sure. But those times are long gone.

 

But the premise you guys are having is a legit one. Do they have different standards for men and women officers? I honestly have no idea.

We are talking semantics, but a front line soldier or special forces is going to be in much more danger than a cop with his regular duties. I respect both professions and both come with life threatening risk. But the military during times of combat is a different level.

 

In times of peace sure. But those times are long gone.

 

But the premise you guys are having is a legit one. Do they have different standards for men and women officers? I honestly have no idea.

 

I don't think we are talking semantics at all, I think police officers are much more likely to end up in solo hand to hand combat and/or other situations where the physical differences that essentially disqualify women from being soldiers come into play.

 

Of course this doesn't surprise me, on top of everything else that is expected of police officers/departments the federal government has been handicapping local law enforcement for years by requiring them to hire less qualified people over more qualified people.

I don't think we are talking semantics at all, I think police officers are much more likely to end up in solo hand to hand combat and/or other situations where the physical differences that essentially disqualify women from being soldiers come into play.

 

Of course this doesn't surprise me, on top of everything else that is expected of police officers/departments the federal government has been handicapping local law enforcement for years by requiring them to hire less qualified people over more qualified people.

 

I guess I'm going to have to disagree if your saying a police officers job is more physically demanding than a front line solider or special forces solider during a time of war.

 

But I 100% agree with your second paragraph.

I don't think we are talking semantics at all, I think police officers are much more likely to end up in solo hand to hand combat and/or other situations where the physical differences that essentially disqualify women from being soldiers come into play.

 

Of course this doesn't surprise me, on top of everything else that is expected of police officers/departments the federal government has been handicapping local law enforcement for years by requiring them to hire less qualified people over more qualified people.

 

Is that why there are so many overweight cops?

We are talking semantics, but a front line soldier or special forces is going to be in much more danger than a cop with his regular duties. I respect both professions and both come with life threatening risk. But the military during times of combat is a different level.

 

In times of peace sure. But those times are long gone.

 

But the premise you guys are having is a legit one. Do they have different standards for men and women officers? I honestly have no idea.

 

I think so, I think some of the standards when to percentages of your bodyweight instead of a standard like OSHA uses in the example above.

 

It's the same kind of garbage logic used for car crash test ratings. Often times they rate the car against itself, and not vehicles that weigh twice as much as the one being tested. If the tests weren't so skewed you would see several vehicles with very low crash ratings and it would be a very consistent rating based on the gross weight of a vehicle.

 

Y'all know, cause little cars only crash into little cars and female police officers only have to fight female bad girls.