Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
peterose313

Chicago FD Must Hire 111 Black Firefighters

28 posts in this topic



Karsh said the test was discriminatory because there was no evidence that the applicant who scored 89 or better would be any better firefighter than another who scored a 64

HAHAHAHA Uhhh what??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Karsh said the test was discriminatory because there was no evidence that the applicant who scored 89 or better would be any better firefighter than another who scored a 64, and in fact in 2005 a federal judge said the test discriminated against black candidates. In her ruling the judge said the city knew the cutoff point was meaningless and would disproportionately exclude blacks from the pool of candidates most likely to be hired.

This story makes me very happy about one point - I don't live anywhere near Chicago. This is absurd and totally demoralizing to all the men and women who took and passed the exam to become firefighters.

I wonder how the judge would feel if she was passed over for law school with a score of 89 so that a person with a score of 64 could take her seat.

I guess this means they better start passing out diplomas to those who failed out of HS also because apparently grades don't matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This really disgusts me. Not because of the race issue, but because qualified cantidates will be skipped over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is everyone getting so upset? This happens right here in our own backyard.....Just sayin'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the same argument that lost NYC their case. Its the disparate impact clause. If you cannot prove that those who score higher on the test make better firefighters and that test has a disproportionate impact on any one group, the test is assumed to be biased. When you look at past FDNY probie classes there is no difference in promotion rates from the first classes off the list to the last classes. Until you can make a test that assesses firefighter ability cities are going to keep losing these cases.

Edited by ny10570
helicopper likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the same argument that lost NYC their case. Its the disparate impact clause. If you cannot prove that those who score higher on the test make better firefighters and that test has a disproportionate impact on any one group, the test is assumed to be biased. When you look at past FDNY probie classes there is no difference in promotion rates from the first classes off the list to the last classes. Until you can make a test that assesses firefighter ability cities are going to keep losing these cases.

This is true, but lets be clear. The issue is not REALLY that this test doesn't do a good job of determining who'd be a better fireman. That's just a clever legal foothold to dig into, somewhere to place the blame.

You know what they should do? Make the test HARD. Not the nonsense open-book exam that it is, legitimately hard. Make this an exam that you actually have to study for. Do whatever you have to, give out the study materials, but at least make the test an event that you have to put some effort into...

...but that will never happen, because it wouldn't get the "desired" results that certain racist organizations are looking for.

helicopper and Alpinerunner like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

HAHAHAHA Uhhh what??

It is partly true as I have seen firefighters up here in Canada who are book smart in testing but are no good on the fire ground.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the same argument that lost NYC their case. Its the disparate impact clause. If you cannot prove that those who score higher on the test make better firefighters and that test has a disproportionate impact on any one group, the test is assumed to be biased. When you look at past FDNY probie classes there is no difference in promotion rates from the first classes off the list to the last classes. Until you can make a test that assesses firefighter ability cities are going to keep losing these cases.

I agree with M'ave, the issue isn't so much the tests themselves, but that the results give the appearance of some sort of bias towards minorities, specifically blacks.

I know in several instances, the perception created is that minorities as a whole did poorly, when the reality was that many did pass the exam, but may not have scored high enough in relation to other applicants to get hired.

I also think the argument about written tests' inability to determine who would make a good firefighter is misplaced, particularly in a large department like Chicago and FDNY. Firefighting requires two things: brains & brawn. I believe the intent of the written exam is to provide an initial assessment of the "brains" part. Basic competency in reading, comprehension, math, writing and such is necessary to successfully complete the training academy. I believe the intent of the physical agility test is to provide an initial assessment of the "brawns" part. A certain level of physical strength, endurance and athletic ability is necessary to successfully complete the training academy.

To me, the testing process is about weeding out candidates that do not have a sufficient level of both, not determining who will or will not make a good firefighter - the start of that determination begins at the Fire Academy. Considering the cost aspect of training a recruit, it makes perfect sense to select candidates who performed the best on both parts and realistically have the best shot at completing the training.

From an efficiency aspect, in terms of both cost and time, it also makes perfect sense to administer a written test to "thin" the applicant pool before giving a physical agility test.

Considering some of the tests in question that I've seen, I don't think the problem is the test or an institutional basis towards minorities, but rather factors external to the FD and the desire for "special" rather than "equal" treatment by some people and organizations.

FD828 likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again "quantity" over "quality"! It amazes me how our Military has higher Standards then the Fire Service. Can you imagine if the Navy Seals lowered their Standards.

Danger likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think these decision makers and lawyers need a real taste of the fire department...

In a fire (or any situation really) if you are the man behind me, I don't give a F what color you are...but you better be the best damn person for that job.

helicopper likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Chicago FD Must Hire 111 Black Firefighters" ... No problem, all it will take is to have 111 black candidates study hard, work out hard and score high on the exam. There is no mystery to a fire department civil service exam, it's all about desire and dedication; if a candidate doesn't have that they don't belong 'on the job'.

Edited by bad box
FD828 and Danger like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at past FDNY probie classes there is no difference in promotion rates from the first classes off the list to the last classes.

I believe the opposite is true. The first classes (Open Competitive, not EMS promotion) have a much higher promotion rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe the opposite is true. The first classes (Open Competitive, not EMS promotion) have a much higher promotion rate.

Does anyone know if they still do the EMS promotional?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

M'Ave you are 100% right that the test is not the issue. The real problem is the dept didn't recruit. They didn't recruit whites, blacks, hispanics, anyone. They never had to, the tests always had a line around the block and before 9/11 lists would never come anywhere near being exhausted. As soon as they started a real recruiting effort aimed at diversifying the dept they affected real change in both the number of minorities and their scores. This is where an activist judge becomes a pain in the a**. Rather than wait and see if this change was meaningful he jumped the gun and will do far more harm the good.

The two accepted ways to address this are a pass/fail test of the skills the dept insists matter or a knowledge based test. Knowledge based test are very expensive and time consuming. You have to be willing to educate all of the applicants to a level where they can not just pass, but pass well.

No matter what happens, the vulcans want a number. They don't care the quotas do more harm than good. They taint every minority member of the dept as having taken the easy way no matter how they actually did it.

Firemedic, your argument is the exact argument for pass/fail testing. The test is just there cut out anyone who cannot make it. The academy is there to make them into good firefighters. You're right, the argument is not that the dept's test is racist. They are saying that the results have a racial bias, the cause of which is irrelevant. If the result is biased you must find a test that does not have the same biased results unless the test is germane to the job.

In NYC's testimony they were unable to prove any difference between candidates at the top of the list and lower on the list once they were hired. They argued the quality of the training is what enabled this equality. They had people testify as to the how much harder the instructors had to work with lower list candidates. They even demonstrated that it took more candidates to fill a class the lower on the list you got. But they were never able to prove list number impacted the quality of the firefighter. Apparently Chicago was unable to also.

Technically there is still an EMS promotional. The last one was combine with the open competitive, so when the judge ruled on one he essentially ruled on both. There is rumor of a promotional coming, but its not a new rumor and it has yet to happen.

helicopper, M' Ave and CFFD117 like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two accepted ways to address this are a pass/fail test of the skills the dept insists matter or a knowledge based test. Knowledge based test are very expensive and time consuming. You have to be willing to educate all of the applicants to a level where they can not just pass, but pass well.

I'm not sure a knowledge based test is more expensive than running all the passing candidate through the next set of testing? How expensive and time consuming would it be to conduct a physical abilities test for 10 times as many people?

The notion that you must pre-training candidates for the job they're applying for is outlandish and shows just how far activist judges are wiling to go to continue to promote a racist agenda. The very point of it is demeaning to those they say "cannot be expected to score as well". This is a court ruled statement that certain persons are less likely to know basic studies based on their skin color or ethnicity! It's unbelievable that anyone would want to be cast in such light. So we have the same people fighting to erase racism trying to prove that they need extra help to pass similar exams? Then, one the other side we have the typical white applicant that does score better by chance or study, who is passed over for a court appointed quota and we expect that he/she will not feel some sort of anger toward those promoting such a system? These practices truly do further racism in America. The words, comments and stigmatisms of my fathers day, have long passes and would not even be thought of today until you read of such nonsense as these types of cases.

I find it hard to believe that any reasonable persons cannot agree that in most cases, a person who does better on a written examination will have a better chance at passing further exams such as rookie school knowledge tests, EMT training, promotions. I'm not sure what recent FDNY entry testing scores had to be to make the list, but I recall numbering the high 90's being tossed around due to the high number of applicants. I suspect that seeing a wide margin of variation in future promotions out of that group cannot be compared to a pass/fail test or one where anyone getting over 70% passes on to the next step.

Forcing any department to take lesser candidates via a modified testing process would make me consider making rookie school testing much harder and bouncing more students who can't keep up. Of course this would just keep open position unfilled longer and increase the costs to the city, but it's someone's job to make sure the citizens and ourselves are protected by only putting the best candidates for the job on the job.

wraftery and JFLYNN like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since in theory the current test is not a predictor of success there would be no additional cost incurred by flushing out candidates in the academy. as for the agility, if you pass the test you get invited to the agility, so there's no extra cost there assuming that the test is just as hard to pass, but not used to rank candidates.

Its not so much that you're pre training candidates, but you have to account for socioeconomic differences. You can test for firefighting knowledge. But then you have to offer all the material and classes to teach the motivated candidates. All this racism crap is just a reflection of their lack of education. The disparity is not because minorities are dumb or the test being racist, there's a massive education gap. For 30 years they've been trying to fix it, and its been an absolute failure. So, since fixing the problem is so hard they've resorted to fixing the symptoms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Firemedic, your argument is the exact argument for pass/fail testing. The test is just there cut out anyone who cannot make it. The academy is there to make them into good firefighters. You're right, the argument is not that the dept's test is racist. They are saying that the results have a racial bias, the cause of which is irrelevant. If the result is biased you must find a test that does not have the same biased results unless the test is germane to the job.

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating for pass/fail testing. There are points in the process were it is applicable, like in the physical agility test (i.e. you can either drag the dummy 100 feet or you can't.) or psychological testing or background checks. However, I strongly believe that written testing should not be simply pass/fail.

If the entire process is "pass/fail" then it creates a situation where you will have to randomly select people to hire among those that "passed" rather than selecting those that performed the best. I just don't believe "random" hiring is the way to achieve the highest quality workforce.

In NYC's testimony they were unable to prove any difference between candidates at the top of the list and lower on the list once they were hired. They argued the quality of the training is what enabled this equality. They had people testify as to the how much harder the instructors had to work with lower list candidates. They even demonstrated that it took more candidates to fill a class the lower on the list you got. But they were never able to prove list number impacted the quality of the firefighter. Apparently Chicago was unable to also.

What was the gap on those test scores?

A co-worker of mine has taken the FDNY test once or twice. If I'm not mistaken, he scored in the low 90s, but ended up being pretty far down on the list. Far enough that based on previous hiring trends, he would likely not get hired before the list expired. If you're talking about only a 10-15 point difference between the highest scoring person hired and the last person hired from that same list, to me, that could easily explain why there wasn't a "provable" difference on outcome - the gap itself wasn't "significant". A 10 percentage point difference on a 200 question test is only 20 incorrect answers.

Now if the gap was more like 30-40 points between first and last hired, then you should be able to prove much more definitively, one way or the other, the impact list number has on the quality of the firefighter they become.

helicopper and antiquefirelt like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until recently the agility was a scored test also. The faster the time, the higher your score. Still not sure why they switched to the CPAT. It kind of flies in the face of their argument that ranked testing is the only way to identify the best candidates. It was also one of the areas where minority candidates excelled.

I know you're not for it, but this bit right here is the argument for pass/fail testing..

I believe the intent of the written exam is to provide an initial assessment of the "brains" part. Basic competency in reading, comprehension, math, writing and such is necessary to successfully complete the training academy. I believe the intent of the physical agility test is to provide an initial assessment of the "brawns" part. A certain level of physical strength, endurance and athletic ability is necessary to successfully complete the training academy.

To me, the testing process is about weeding out candidates that do not have a sufficient level of both, not determining who will or will not make a good firefighter - the start of that determination begins at the Fire Academy.

You establish a minimum, test to that level and let the academy sort out the rest.

Its an incredibly narrow window that the dept traditionally hires from. That absolutely hindered their argument. It was their job to prove that the test was a good assessment for future success within the dept. They can't argue that lower candidates who never even got hired would probably have done worse.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Since in theory the current test is not a predictor of success there would be no additional cost incurred by flushing out candidates in the academy. as for the agility, if you pass the test you get invited to the agility, so there's no extra cost there assuming that the test is just as hard to pass, but not used to rank candidates.

I disagree that there is no additional cost. There is a real world cost to send a candidate to the Fire Academy. If a candidate fails, then another candidate will be needed to replace them in the next class. If more lower quality candidates are sent to the Fire Academy, which would likely happen in a pass/fail testing process, then it's highly likely that the "failure rate" at the Fire Academy will go up. If the failure rate goes up, then that amounts to an increased cost for training candidates since you will have had to attempt to train more candidates to fill a specific number of vacancies than you would have at the previous "failure rate".
..........., but you have to account for socioeconomic differences.

Why?

Why does a pre-employment testing process have to "make up" for a potential failure of the educational system or what could arguably be seen as a personal/family failure regarding elementary and secondary education? If children can go to the same schools and graduate with decent grades, then why does an employer have to "account for" the ones that didn't do so well in their hiring practices in order to potentially hire these "lesser qualified" applicants?

Why does there seem to be such a blatant double standard for civil service related employment? Why do individual departments within a single employer (the municipality) have to reflect the overall racial balance of the residents of the entire municipality? If these departments need to be individually racially balanced to reflect the entire community, then shouldn't the neighborhoods be racially balanced too instead of being as segregated as some are?

What about other employers in the community? What's the racial balance of Best Buy's consumers or Subway's or Target's or whomever? Shouldn't their employee make up reflect the racial balance of their consumers too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Until recently the agility was a scored test also. The faster the time, the higher your score. Still not sure why they switched to the CPAT. It kind of flies in the face of their argument that ranked testing is the only way to identify the best candidates. It was also one of the areas where minority candidates excelled.

I know you're not for it, but this bit right here is the argument for pass/fail testing..

You establish a minimum, test to that level and let the academy sort out the rest.

Its an incredibly narrow window that the dept traditionally hires from. That absolutely hindered their argument. It was their job to prove that the test was a good assessment for future success within the dept. They can't argue that lower candidates who never even got hired would probably have done worse.

So in the end, the choices would be made at random from the number that passed all the pass/fail tests? This is the everyone must play fair theory on steroids! Life isn't fair, it is all about trying harder and doing better to succeed. Rewarding mediocrity no matter how hard the pass/fail test is seems like just what it is, giving jobs to lesser applicants regardless of color or sex or whatever.

But I doubt that the a pass/fail system that took weeded out the same number of people by raising he passing score to 95% instead of picking a number of candidates from the ranking scores would have any different outcome. Does the ethnic make up of the candidates moving on past the written exam meet with the "aggrieved parties" approval? If that was the only change, I could kind of buy it, though it doesn't promote he proper attitude that you should try harder to succeed.

I'd bet that this pass/fail test system would drive away many quality applicants who are not willing to put it all on the line for a final random choice. Why study any more or try to ensure you excel when regardless of how well you do, it may be all for not, just to ensure the ethnicity, of those who ask no questions before putting their lives on the line, meet a particular make up?

Edited by antiquefirelt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You establish a minimum, test to that level and let the academy sort out the rest.

Right and that's pretty much what has been in place along with a mechanism to "rank" the candidates for potential hiring to the academy. The problem isn't the testing.
Its an incredibly narrow window that the dept traditionally hires from. That absolutely hindered their argument. It was their job to prove that the test was a good assessment for future success within the dept. They can't argue that lower candidates who never even got hired would probably have done worse.

Call it semantics, but I disagree that it was the City's "job to prove that the test was a good assessment for future success". The City's "job" was to identify candidates for hire in a fashion that was "equal" for all that applied. Let's be honest, if a test could account for every "weakness" of the applicants, then there wouldn't be much point to having a test. One could easily argue that physical agility tests are "intentionally" discriminatory towards people who are not physically fit. One could easily argue that academic tests are "intentionally" discriminatory towards people who are not smart.

The City was tasked (by the legal system) with the burden to disprove one thing (intentional discrimination, specifically towards blacks) by proving something arguably unrelated (that test scores specifically predict success).

The problem is not the test.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Still not sure why they switched to the CPAT.

DOJ made it know that if you used the CPAT it would not be ruled discriminatory against females. Which I agree was a bad choice. The nations most vertical city could certainly make a case that a more difficult agility test was warranted. Lets face it the gear and tool assignments are heavier than 10 years ago. As we see there is no way to win in the game of policical correctness if you attempt to maintain high standards. That's why places finally throw in the towel and go to pass fail. Is the stupid Chicago method really more fair when they are picking out of a hat?

M' Ave likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I disagree that there is no additional cost. There is a real world cost to send a candidate to the Fire Academy. If a candidate fails, then another candidate will be needed to replace them in the next class. If more lower quality candidates are sent to the Fire Academy, which would likely happen in a pass/fail testing process, then it's highly likely that the "failure rate" at the Fire Academy will go up. If the failure rate goes up, then that amounts to an increased cost for training candidates since you will have had to attempt to train more candidates to fill a specific number of vacancies than you would have at the previous "failure rate".

That will very likely be the reality of the situation. The courts do not have to act on what we all know. They can only act on what can be proven. If you cannot prove a higher fail rate then you're stuck. If you're expecting a practical decision from the judge, then you didn't read his proposed solutions.

Why?

Why does a pre-employment testing process have to "make up" for a potential failure of the educational system or what could arguably be seen as a personal/family failure regarding elementary and secondary education? If children can go to the same schools and graduate with decent grades, then why does an employer have to "account for" the ones that didn't do so well in their hiring practices in order to potentially hire these "lesser qualified" applicants?

Because this isn't about a few individuals who just aren't succeeding. For a variety of reasons entire black and hispanic communities are getting a crap education. While most of these problems are coming from within the community the problems are there and the end result is large numbers of people who are doing poorly on the exam. Because they do poorly on the exam and the city cannot prove that these individuals are less capable you end up where we are.

Why does there seem to be such a blatant double standard for civil service related employment? Why do individual departments within a single employer (the municipality) have to reflect the overall racial balance of the residents of the entire municipality? If these departments need to be individually racially balanced to reflect the entire community, then shouldn't the neighborhoods be racially balanced too instead of being as segregated as some are?

What about other employers in the community? What's the racial balance of Best Buy's consumers or Subway's or Target's or whomever? Shouldn't their employee make up reflect the racial balance of their consumers too?

Now you're starting to dip into the whole white guilt part of this. No one that I'm aware of has sued to diversify Traffic, DHS, or any other minority dominated agency. They may succeed, but then they'd be stuck working there. Every major corporation's HR departments are acutely aware of the racial make up of their people. Accusations of discrimination are taken seriously and acted on swiftly long before it reaches the courts. This is the world where affirmative action started.

Right and that's pretty much what has been in place along with a mechanism to "rank" the candidates for potential hiring to the academy. The problem isn't the testing.

Call it semantics, but I disagree that it was the City's "job to prove that the test was a good assessment for future success". The City's "job" was to identify candidates for hire in a fashion that was "equal" for all that applied. Let's be honest, if a test could account for every "weakness" of the applicants, then there wouldn't be much point to having a test. One could easily argue that physical agility tests are "intentionally" discriminatory towards people who are not physically fit. One could easily argue that academic tests are "intentionally" discriminatory towards people who are not smart.

The City was tasked (by the legal system) with the burden to disprove one thing (intentional discrimination, specifically towards blacks) by proving something arguably unrelated (that test scores specifically predict success).

The problem is not the test.

The burden of proof was placed upon the city once the litigants claimed the test was capricious and not an accurate assessment of firefighter candidate competency.

DOJ made it know that if you used the CPAT it would not be ruled discriminatory against females. Which I agree was a bad choice. The nations most vertical city could certainly make a case that a more difficult agility test was warranted. Lets face it the gear and tool assignments are heavier than 10 years ago. As we see there is no way to win in the game of policical correctness if you attempt to maintain high standards. That's why places finally throw in the towel and go to pass fail. Is the stupid Chicago method really more fair when they are picking out of a hat?

Thanks.

Personally I feel the last fire exam was the best route towards developing a test that would meet these standards. Combined with the depts agressive recruitment of minorities there was already an improvement and as more minorities got on the job, the racist good ol boys club stigma would have eased and more quality minority candidates would follow. But an a****** stepping in and reached further than he had to. At the heart of all these rulings the laws and precedents are clear. No matter what we know or how we feel about these decisions they are going to keep on coming back this way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That will very likely be the reality of the situation. The courts do not have to act on what we all know. They can only act on what can be proven. If you cannot prove a higher fail rate then you're stuck. If you're expecting a practical decision from the judge, then you didn't read his proposed solutions.

Because this isn't about a few individuals who just aren't succeeding. For a variety of reasons entire black and hispanic communities are getting a crap education. While most of these problems are coming from within the community the problems are there and the end result is large numbers of people who are doing poorly on the exam. Because they do poorly on the exam and the city cannot prove that these individuals are less capable you end up where we are.

I think you're misunderstanding my point. I understand this isn't about specific individuals and I understand the legal aspect of what's going on. The inherent problem is that individuals from specific races aren't applying for the positions in large numbers and the ones that do aren't doing as well as compared to whites. The problem isn't the test, the problem is in large part probably due to the poor education that those groups have. Who's to blame for that? The fault is more than likely part system failure and part failure of the individual and their parents/guardians to put in sufficient effort to ensure the individual gets educated. It's certainly not the FD's fault.

However, the remedy for segments of the population who are responsible for not obtaining the education available to them is to drop hiring standards and hand them jobs?

The burden of proof was placed upon the city once the litigants claimed the test was capricious and not an accurate assessment of firefighter candidate competency.

I believe the initial claims were not that the test didn't accurately assess competency, but rather that the test were discriminatory because not enough minorities were passing and being hired. I'm pretty sure the assessment arguments come up later as an attempt to substantiate the discrimination claims. I believe this happened because there really was no proof that the tests were in fact discriminatory towards any group, so the argument shifted to that of proving a direct link between the testing and the job itself and subsequently that success in the testing phase is a direct predictor of success as a firefighter.

Again, the issue isn't the test, it's the opinion that not enough minorities are being hired into the departments.

I understand the legal aspect of what is required of the City regarding the litigation. I was commenting on the lunacy of the task. The City is being accused of intentional discrimination when clearly the testing process is not and being asked to prove their innocence by proving that the test has direct relevancy to the job itself. It's crazy because IMO, the intent of the test is not to find candidates who absolutely will be good firefighters, but to identify good candidates to train to be firefighters, yet they are being asked to prove the testing can do something it really wasn't designed to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DOJ made it know that if you used the CPAT it would not be ruled discriminatory against females. Which I agree was a bad choice. The nations most vertical city could certainly make a case that a more difficult agility test was warranted. Lets face it the gear and tool assignments are heavier than 10 years ago. As we see there is no way to win in the game of policical correctness if you attempt to maintain high standards. That's why places finally throw in the towel and go to pass fail. Is the stupid Chicago method really more fair when they are picking out of a hat?

It was a bad choice indeed! Nothing like setting the bar low as can be. I was hired prior to use of the CPAT, but we did go through it at the end of the academy while obtaining our FF 1&2 national certs. IT IS A JOKE. After completing the Functional Skills Training course at The Rock week after week, the CPAT was a breeze. I don't think I remember anyone breaking a sweat..........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With a pretty fresh non-union displaced fracture of my collar bone I was able to cruise through the CPAT with little more than one arm. Hardest part was putting the weight vest on the fracture. Almost every failure I've witnessed has been technical; tripping on the step mill, dropping the ladder, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.