Modifying Physical Agility Requirements Polies to Achieve Gender Parity

Answer

Modifying Physical Agility Requirements Polies to Achieve Gender Parity

According to the United Nations (UN) General Assembly, its member states have to enact policies that foster the status of women. Such initiatives are aimed at promoting the dignity of women and helping them gain their rightful place in society. As much as this is the case, the accompanying legislative reforms are challenging employment practices. This is the case with the New York City Fire Department (FDNY) where employees are displeased by the management’s decision to lower standards to accommodate more women (Shaw, 2015). It is upon this basis that this discussion disagrees with FDNY’s decision to hire underqualified female firefighters. In the second part, it argues that physical agility requirements in policing should not be modified to increase the number of female police officers.

As evident in the case study, FDNY’s decision causes more damage than good. This is notable in the reaction by the employees who feel demotivated and discouraged by the fact that the organization is lowering recruitment standards to accommodate more women at the expense of their safety (Shaw, 2015). They argue that the work of a firefighter is physically demanding and thus, it requires fit people who have merited by passing the physical agility requirements tests. However, accommodating people who have failed some of the tests means a weaker firefighter’s team. This endangers the whole team citing that the ‘chain is as weak as its weakest link’ (Shaw, 2015). This not only endangers the teams, but also the civilians.

Secondly, the other employees argue that as much as policy reforms would promote gender equality in a profession with 44 women out of the total number of 10,500 firefights at the Big Apple firefighter’s facility, the failure to reward merit means they have to endure mediocrity (Shaw, 2015). Such a move is unfair to the people who were disqualified in the past for failing to meet the physical agility requirements. It is equally unfair to the current employees who had to endure the torturous exercises to merit for the job.

The answer to the second question reinforces the answers in the first question. Physical agility requirements in policing should not be modified to favor and increase the number of female police officers being hired. First, modifying policies to favor a given group goes against the principles of fairness (Harper, 2016). This amounts to favoring the female gender which will cause an unfavorable impact on the motivation of the males in the profession. Second, modifying policies to suit a certain group goes against the principles of merit. In fact, setting different standards for women means that men will have to endure working with underqualified colleagues. In return, the whole team will be as weak as the weakest employees.

In conclusion, this discussion argues against modifying policies to promote gender parity. Instead, it would be prudent that the government finds appropriate ways of increasing gender equality by hiring women in other positions that could enhance their useful to certain departments such as the police and firefighters. For instance, women could serve in leadership positions where they influence policies and boost the ratio of women against men.