Age Limits, Civil Service Tests, And The Economy

[x635 4,066]

A couple of weeks ago, I met someone who was at the top of the list for hiring for a Police department, and had actually been promised a spot in the academy. However, the economy changed all that, and his academy date (and official hiring date) keeps getting pushed back. He's been on the list after serving several years in the military.

The problem? He is 32 years old.....the cutoff for hiring is 32. If he turns 33 before the next academy starts......he is out of luck on attempting to become a LEO.

Which leads me to wondering......do you think that that "cutoff age" should be adjusted due to the economy? Is it fair to have a civil service list, which in NY amongst other places, is really useless for the foreseable future? Should they hold the current lists until a certain amount of people are hired, and then open a new exam?

[abaduck 123]

As an immigrant to these shores, I'd go further and question why the heck people seem to feel having a cutoff age is necessary, let alone permissible?

You hire the best people to do the job, period. It's that simple.

Doing anything else is failing in your fiduciary duty to the taxpayers, and I don't understand why it hasn't been litigated against successfully. Who gives a damn what age an applicant is, if they have everything you're looking for? The practice of having a cutoff age is simply unheard of in the UK, and they seem to manage just fine, so I'm not prepared to accept it as a given.

(Disclaimer: personal interest. I'm 45, and if I was a few years younger, and/or the cutoff ages were a few years older, I would be trying to get hired myself!)

Edited June 8, 2009 by abaduck

[x129K 1,393]

You hire the best people to do the job, period. It's that simple.

Hahhaaaa.....hahahahahahaaaa.....HAHAHAHAHAAAAA......HAAHAHHAHHAHHAHHAAAAHHAHHAHHAHHAAAAA!

We are talking about "civil" service here!

(no offense you you sir.....)

[lad12derff 283]

A couple of weeks ago, I met someone who was at the top of the list for hiring for a Police department, and had actually been promised a spot in the academy. However, the economy changed all that, and his academy date (and official hiring date) keeps getting pushed back. He's been on the list after serving several years in the military.

The problem? He is 32 years old.....the cutoff for hiring is 32. If he turns 33 before the next academy starts......he is out of luck on attempting to become a LEO.

Which leads me to wondering......do you think that that "cutoff age" should be adjusted due to the economy? Is it fair to have a civil service list, which in NY amongst other places, is really useless for the foreseable future? Should they hold the current lists until a certain amount of people are hired, and then open a new exam?

Seth, you are a little unclear here. Is this a NYS civil service applicant? My understanding for most cut off ages is you must take the test before your 29th birthday not appointed by. You will recieve 1 year credit for every year of military service. So if you serve 4 years you will be able to take the test until 33. I am not sure how many years are the max IE you can't do 20 years and be able to seek employment till 49. If anyone can clear this up it would be great. You state he is 32 going on 33 and served time in the military. How many years? As for extending the list I do not feel it is right. We have the laws for a reason and they should be followed. How would it look if you held the list to get to someones son/daughter and others were not afforded the same chance.

[lad12derff 283]

As an immigrant to these shores, I'd go further and question why the heck people seem to feel having a cutoff age is necessary, let alone permissible?

You hire the best people to do the job, period. It's that simple.

Doing anything else is failing in your fiduciary duty to the taxpayers, and I don't understand why it hasn't been litigated against successfully. Who gives a damn what age an applicant is, if they have everything you're looking for? The practice of having a cutoff age is simply unheard of in the UK, and they seem to manage just fine, so I'm not prepared to accept it as a given.

(Disclaimer: personal interest. I'm 45, and if I was a few years younger, and/or the cutoff ages were a few years older, I would be trying to get hired myself!)

The reason for the age is not what you can do at 45 its what you can't do at 55 or 60. Fire and police jobs are young men's jobs. They are not for older people who hurt more and recover slower. That is why we have the 20 and out. Gov. Patterson is a fool for vetoing a law that gave new members this age for retirement. It will never save the state money but cost them money in the long run when you force someone to stay till they are old and grey and seek disability benefits for life on an injury that was job incurred. So it is not so simple to hire someone because the are the best for the job at a older age, there are other considerations.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

I have not taken civil service exams nor even had a desire to but the rules regarding application for a job are the rules. You cant bend them for one person and not for everyone else it defeats the logic and purpose behind the rules, requirements and laws of civil service.

I feel bad for this guy but if he really wanted to be a cop that badly then he had over 10 years prior to him being too old in order to do so. Being in the military or other career is no excuse unfortunately.

[Guest Firediver]

I believe that a max of 4yrs can be added to your age along with an Honorable Discharge as to bring you below age limit from what I remember. 33yrs - 4yrs(military)=29yrs. Anything more would be unrealistic for the city/town etc. to invest in you. I'm sure they wouldn't see it as a 39yr old - 10yrs(military)=29yr old. Maybe Hudson144 could correct me if I'm wrong.

[Guest Firediver]

Where he is using the military as an "EXCUSE"? The age limit cutoff (of upto 4yrs I believe) is a courtesy extended to those who have volunteered to serve this GREAT country. DO NOT FORGET THAT!! You can have those yrs too if you wanted.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

My patriotism is not the issue here....I love this country. Excuse maybe was the wrong word.

He had more time in his life than just during this economy to become a police officer, he chose to join the military and do other things with his life other than become a police officer. However, now he wants to do it but the economy wont let him. I am sorry for him but again, he had many many other years to do it before right now. He got shut out because he is too old and they wont hire him because they dont have the money, it sucks but it happens.

We can not have the rules apply only to some people and not others.

If his time in the military exempts him from the age limit that is one thing and more power to him but as I think it stands now, they say he is too old and frankly the laws and exam requirements exist for a reason, not just to make people happy but to make it fair.

They are many many many many stories of people being promised jobs that no longer exist thanks to the economy. FDNY, Wall Street Law firms, CNN and countless other places have promised people jobs only to let them know that they cant have them because they will not hire anyone.

Edited June 8, 2009 by bvfdjc316

[Guest Firediver]

And you know he had ALL this other time to become a LEO how? Maybe he was set to get out and they extended his seperation date due to the GWOT? Unless you know him and have walked in his shoes you can not speculate how much "TIME" he had to do other things. Thanks . and "if" you do know him I apologize and I never questioned your patriotism for all I know you could be scout leader.(insert laugh here)

[INIT915 1,119]

I believe that a max of 4yrs can be added to your age along with an Honorable Discharge as to bring you below age limit from what I remember. 33yrs - 4yrs(military)=29yrs. Anything more would be unrealistic for the city/town etc. to invest in you. I'm sure they wouldn't see it as a 39yr old - 10yrs(military)=29yr old. Maybe Hudson144 could correct me if I'm wrong.

For the State Police it's 6 years. Normal cut-off of 30 years old (on the date of the written exam, not appointment), which can be extended up to age 36 if you had 6 years of military.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

It matters not if he was in the military for one day or for ten years.....the day he turned 21 or 18 I dont know, he could have become a police officer. However, he joined the military instead. Now that he wants to be a police officer, his time spent not trying to be a police officer has caused him not trying to be a police officer. It is really terrible that he has missed his chance but what should I do if I am on that list too, but I did not spend a year too long the military or doing something else instead of trying. Should this guy really get the job because he really wants it and was a veteran but spend a year doing something else when he could have been trying to be a police officer or should I get because I am doing it when I am the right age, at the right time.

As I have said before, it really sucks to be him, but this economy is facing everyone. There is no reason to give this guy a preferential treatment when he filed for the test and position about a year to 6 months too late.

Timing is everything and before it gets further personal, QTIP....if you wanted a country where everyone had a job and everything was fair, even and equal and this guy would not be getting screwed than I shall call you comrade because you are talking about socialism and communism Mr Marx.

[Guest Firediver]

Ok good. So upto 6 yrs for the State PD but I can't see more than that. But then again I have been surprised before. Thanks, hopefully this gives someone a chance to have a career after service.

[Guest Firediver]

You have really twisted what I said to you. It wasn't personal at all, I just turned the dimmer up for ya. You can have my cup of kool-aid if you like, I'm not drinking it. I NEVER said he should get the job b/c he really really wants it and he served. Did I? Yes it is a shame if he does not get hired before the cutoff military time or not but Unless he was given a letter of employment then he's the fool for believing someone who promised him the job. A promise?

[PoqFFEMT 6]

Ok... My 2 Cents... I'm currently Military. Air Force at that. I've been in a little over 16 yrs right now. When I'm out, I'm pursuing a FF/EMT-P career here in Va. It pisses me off that you say I missed the boat because of my choices. Yes I chose to join the AF. I also chose to stay in for 20. Why? Because I love the job I do. I would not trade these 16 years for anything. I've been over there protecting my country and what I believe in.

I've stayed active as a Vol wherever I've gone. Kept up my training on the fire and EMS side. I keep fit and I bet I can run circles around a most my age. I even do so regularly to the paid portion of the fire dept I vol at. Am I looking to be running when I'm 60? I doubt it, but I can see me putting the training I've gathered over the last 20+ years of being a vol FF/EMT AND a Non-Commissioned Officer to use.

Again, my 2 cents!

[hudson144 150]

The age cutoff is different all over the place, some places may have a cutoff of 29,some don't have age stipulations because of certain reasons like decrees etc. I have a friend that did 20 in the USAF as a law enforcement officer, He got out at 38 yrs old and went to work as a cop, even if he did 20 in the PD he still is fairly young at 58 when he retires from there. Like anything else out there it at times appears to me to be the luck of the draw. I know that I dont want to be doing what I do now at 62 yrs old. Yes,it is a young mans job but many of us stay because of the love for the job. Our 1 time Gov. should be worrying about alot of other places to cut rather that the PD/FD pensions. This state has alot of other places to save money especially our local taxes,schools to be more specific!

[khas143 13]

There are a couple of reasons that the exemptions for military personnel are in place. First and I would say foremost would be the fact they served our country. The military gets paid nothing compared to civil service and if military personnel want to further serve their country when they get out we should bend over back-words to accommodate them if they are qualified. Second, military personnel have to maintain a level of physical fitness that we "ordinary" civilians do not. I have NEVER seen a prior military person have any issues with the physical fitness requirements of the Police Academy but I have certainly seen 21 year olds have issues. Is the age extension warranted when it comes to military service, IMHO ABSOLUTELY!!

[ny10570 745]

A couple of weeks ago, I met someone who was at the top of the list for hiring for a Police department, and had actually been promised a spot in the academy. However, the economy changed all that, and his academy date (and official hiring date) keeps getting pushed back. He's been on the list after serving several years in the military.

The problem? He is 32 years old.....the cutoff for hiring is 32. If he turns 33 before the next academy starts......he is out of luck on attempting to become a LEO.

Which leads me to wondering......do you think that that "cutoff age" should be adjusted due to the economy? Is it fair to have a civil service list, which in NY amongst other places, is really useless for the foreseable future? Should they hold the current lists until a certain amount of people are hired, and then open a new exam?

I'm in a similar boat. After a series of SNAFUs I'm finally guaranteed a spot in a class (#14 on the list). I deferred to the next class so I could finish my nearly completed paramedic training and they stop hiring. I'm quickly running out of options in my last year of eligibility. Its not fair to change the rules because of the economy. You extend this list and delay the next one and you've probably screwed just as many people. Since wither way someone loses its only fair to go by the established rules.

[antiquefirelt 994]

There are a couple of reasons that the exemptions for military personnel are in place. First and I would say foremost would be the fact they served our country. The military gets paid nothing compared to civil service and if military personnel want to further serve their country when they get out we should bend over back-words to accommodate them if they are qualified. Second, military personnel have to maintain a level of physical fitness that we "ordinary" civilians do not. I have NEVER seen a prior military person have any issues with the physical fitness requirements of the Police Academy but I have certainly seen 21 year olds have issues. Is the age extension warranted when it comes to military service, IMHO ABSOLUTELY!!

Good points. I'd add that military veterans tend to be less whiny employees. They understand rules and while they may question or comment, most often they fall in line. This is in great contrast to many new hires in the last 10 years who seem to have a sense of entitlement. For most vets, the job of LEO or firefighter wil not be the most demanding thing they've done, unlike the 18-20 something wonders who've washed cars or interned in an office. I find they're more like to have a "can do" attitude. Add this to what was quoted above and you should see why veterans are given "credit" years.

BTW- I'm not a vet, but I have been a supervisor of many municipal firefighters and I have to say, given all things being equal (well not even equal) I'd take the veterans I've had any day.

[FirNaTine 370]

The reason for the age is not what you can do at 45 its what you can't do at 55 or 60. Fire and police jobs are young men's jobs. They are not for older people who hurt more and recover slower. That is why we have the 20 and out. Gov. Patterson is a fool for vetoing a law that gave new members this age for retirement. It will never save the state money but cost them money in the long run when you force someone to stay till they are old and grey and seek disability benefits for life on an injury that was job incurred. So it is not so simple to hire someone because the are the best for the job at a older age, there are other considerations.

The scarry thing though Bro. is, I see more younger guys going down at and after a job, then the older guys and that's a fact! It seems to be the "Norm" now then the "Exception" like it was yrs ago.

[JFLYNN 681]

A couple of weeks ago, I met someone who was at the top of the list for hiring for a Police department, and had actually been promised a spot in the academy. However, the economy changed all that, and his academy date (and official hiring date) keeps getting pushed back. He's been on the list after serving several years in the military.

The problem? He is 32 years old.....the cutoff for hiring is 32. If he turns 33 before the next academy starts......he is out of luck on attempting to become a LEO.

Which leads me to wondering......do you think that that "cutoff age" should be adjusted due to the economy? Is it fair to have a civil service list, which in NY amongst other places, is really useless for the foreseable future? Should they hold the current lists until a certain amount of people are hired, and then open a new exam?

A lot of good opinions have been expressed in response to this post, and a few off the wall, even nasty posts, IMO.

However, one thing that should be kept in mind is that in NYS, and many other states, civil service law was created as a way to control corruption and unfairness in hiring practices, i.e. Tammany Hall, etc.

Civil Service Laws were written to take the politics and politicians completely out of the hiring and promotion process. The system we have today in NYS is definitely not completely fair, and definitely the best and / or most deserving candidates are not hired or promoted, but if the laws are followed as written, generally it is a level playing field. Of course, since NYS and local civil service laws were originally written, there have been many amendments, court judgements, and consent decrees which vary from municipality to municipality. Some of these changes have, (again IMO) resulted in a more fair or just hiring or promotion practice, such as points and considerations for veterans. Some have resulted (IMO) in a less fair hiring practice, such as points and considerations for minorities and women.

The idea of the most qualified or deserving candidates being hired is a good one in theory. However, time has shown that anytime you meddle with civil service law, even if your intentions are good, you open the door for unscrupulous individuals to meddle with the whole process for political reasons. The more subjective you make the test, i.e. extending lists in a bad economy, oral interviews, simulations, resumes, etc., the more you open the door for corruption or the good old boy network to rear it's ugly head.

As far as age limits, my opinion as a Fire Chief is that there should be a maximum age limit for hiring. What that number should be is open to debate, but it is a young man's job. Veteran's should be given maximum accomodation, IMO- they deserve it, and yes, their military training and experience is almost always an asset to any fire department. If we were ever able to accomplish rigorous ongoing physical fitness standards, which unfortunately isn't happening anytime soon, then maybe we could throw maximum entry and retirement ages out. Without any real ongoing physical fitness standards, we have no choice but to rely on age limits to give us the best chance of having somewhat physically fit people doing this physically demanding, hazardous job.

Last, since we're talking about age limits and physical fitness, and maybe this should be the subject of another thread, I believe every firefighter, career or volunteer, proby all the way through chief of department, has an obligation to be in excellent physical shape. I believe this is a HUGE problem in the volunteer fire service, and it is a big problem in the career fire service. How many of you reading this right now are shaped like a pear? At what point does personal responsibility come in?

[hudson144 150]

The one of three rule in civil service was designed to give a municipality the option to "skip" a candidate who may not qualify for the position, not to be used as a excuse to hire/promote for political payback or for race. Often a problem in a dept that I am associated with that will be addressed in time. The correct way to do things may be to go down the list in order, eliminates problems between the troops and keeps morale where it should be. A rule often overlooked "If a candidate is willing to be appointed to the vacant position there is no reason to canvass the list", WOW- just had a flashback! lol

* As far a being in shape- isn't round a shape? lol

[abaduck 123]

The scarry thing though Bro. is, I see more younger guys going down at and after a job, then the older guys and that's a fact! It seems to be the "Norm" now then the "Exception" like it was yrs ago.

There's some truth in that... I'm 45 and... perhaps very mildly pear-shaped, as Chief Flynn put it so delicately! Although I can still swing on the monkey bars with my kids. But on a recent FAST class I was standing firm when some (not all, not most, but some) guys half my age and less pear-shaped were getting a little wobbly in the legs. Old age and cunning has a lot going for it - as has knowledge of your own limits, and what you're really capable of when pushed. Which is more than the youngsters realize, I think - it comes with experience. Not even fire service experience, just the school of hard knocks.

[JFLYNN 681]

There's some truth in that... I'm 45 and... perhaps very mildly pear-shaped, as Chief Flynn put it so delicately! Although I can still swing on the monkey bars with my kids. But on a recent FAST class I was standing firm when some (not all, not most, but some) guys half my age and less pear-shaped were getting a little wobbly in the legs. Old age and cunning has a lot going for it - as has knowledge of your own limits, and what you're really capable of when pushed. Which is more than the youngsters realize, I think - it comes with experience. Not even fire service experience, just the school of hard knocks.

I don't know you at all, but frankly, I've worked with more than a few older (and younger) guys who spout the same line about old age and cunning and experience making up for them being "a little out of shape"...I'm just not buying...and I taught MANY volunteer firefighters, young and old, who looked and performed like they had never exercised even one time in their lives to the point where they were sweating and out of breath. They got out of breath just putting their turnout gear on- not just a few, lots of them!

Look, all fires go out eventually- many of them because they simply ran out of fuel. We don't always do a good job and lots of times it's because a lot of us are not in shape. I wish I had a penny for every time I heard, "we always put the fires out, what's the problem?" "maybe I'm a little out of shape, but I get the job done", "guys who work out get hurt more and don't work as hard at a fire"... ok guys, MAYBE you believe that nonsense, but I never have.

Utter hypocrisy is when people try to change the way the job is done to suit their level of fitness. How many times have I heard an out of shape officer or firefighter tell the rest of his crew, "pace yourself guys", what a crock, the answer should be, we are pacing ourselves and pushing ourselves because we want to put this fire out before it puts itself out,why can't you keep up??

[lad12derff 283]

The scarry thing though Bro. is, I see more younger guys going down at and after a job, then the older guys and that's a fact! It seems to be the "Norm" now then the "Exception" like it was yrs ago.

I have to agree with you there Brother. Playing video games and texting just don't get you in shape now does it?

[Remember585 815]

I have to agree with you there Brother. Playing video games and texting just don't get you in shape now does it?

But their thumbs are strong as hell!

[x635 4,066]

Here's more information:

He joined the military for a 4 year commitment after college. After colllege, he took a few civil service exams, and joined the reserves. He was sent overseas for a couple of tours, and returned home, took the civil service test again.....got through the hiring process....and the economy tanked, and the academy was cancelled.

My main question, though, is about the economy, hiring process, and how I feel it is unfairly excluding excellent canidates who don't have any chance at all, really, in the current economy.

This is not a NYS or TX Civil Service applicant.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

I have to agree with you there Brother. Playing video games and texting just don't get you in shape now does it?

But then again a pack of marlboro reds and a 6 pack of Bud wont do it either.....

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

Here's more information:

He joined the military for a 4 year commitment after college. After colllege, he took a few civil service exams, and joined the reserves. He was sent overseas for a couple of tours, and returned home, took the civil service test again.....got through the hiring process....and the economy tanked, and the academy was cancelled.

My main question, though, is about the economy, hiring process, and how I feel it is unfairly excluding excellent canidates who don't have any chance at all, really, in the current economy.

This is not a NYS or TX Civil Service applicant.

The economy hurts everyone, those who score high and are qualified and those who do not. Governments are not making an exception if you were #1 or #5,000,000....they are still not hiring....

This man made a series of decisions in his life that prevented him from being a cop before the economy tanked.....and now that it has and he wants this job he missed out....

just like any timeframe or window, once it is closed it is closed.

Like JFLYNN said, civil service is made to be as fair as possible.....you cant make one exception here, here and here but not then make those same exceptions for everyone else.

If you want 100% job security and fair and equal treatment in getting that job, America is not the place for you.....you my friend would be a socialist.....

(this is not directed at anyone)

Edited June 9, 2009 by bvfdjc316

[Bnechis 3,961]

The one of three rule in civil service was designed to give a municipality the option to "skip" a candidate who may not qualify for the position, not to be used as a excuse to hire/promote for political payback or for race. Often a problem in a dept that I am associated with that will be addressed in time. The correct way to do things may be to go down the list in order, eliminates problems between the troops and keeps morale where it should be. A rule often overlooked "If a candidate is willing to be appointed to the vacant position there is no reason to canvass the list", WOW- just had a flashback! lol

While I generally agree that the list should be followed, having the one in three rule also means that if the guy in #1 had a great day or is the smartest on the job, if his personnel folder is 6" thick because of all the charges, for late, fighting, etc. and he is borderline for dismisal, but #2 or 3 is clearly a leader, that knows the job and who would improve morale 1000%. the chief has the option.