Arathain Kelvar wrote:
I don't get it. There must be other requirements. Because... I'd think that scores wouldn't matter. You need X new officers, you accept the top X scores.
There must be more to it.
There is. Like I said, you start at the top and work your way down, but just passing the written test doesn't mean you get hired.
Let's say you have a medium-sized city police force, and you anticipate hiring 24 new officers this year, or about 1 every 2 weeks or so, to keep pace with attrition.
Now, in Ohio, where I have taken entirely too many police tests, you generally test the first 200 individuals to turn in a completed application. Let's say for the sake of argument that 70% is passing, and let's further assume that 3/4 the test takers pass, just to keep the numbers easy.
You now have a pool of 150 applicants to hire from, good for the life of the list, right? Let's say by law you have to give a test every 2 years.
Not exactly. Most likely, you will give all the passing scores a PT test, in order to have it over and done with. Let's say 30% of that 150 fail the PT test, so now you have 105 names.
Now you need to start hiring from the list. Generally, there are civil service rules saying you need to interview X number of people per open position, or there is a formula where if you have a large number of open positions you don't need to interview int he same proportion. For example, you might be required to interview 10 people minimum, or 3 per open position, whichever is higher.
So lets say you need to interview 72 people for these 24 spots. You interview 72; lets say 50 are determined suitable. Now you go into medical, psychological, polygraph, and background.
Depending on how those go, you might have more or less suitable people at the end than the 24 you need. If more, some won't be hired, but will generally be retained as eligable in case you need more people.
Lets say you only end up with 20. You need 4 more. Now you start over with your pool of 105 and interview another 12. You go through the process again, and get your 4, and lets say 2 are still suitable.
Now, next year rolls around and you need to hire another 24 for attrition. You can hire 2 right away, but the other 22 you need to hire have to come from a pool that's down to 21 applicants.
Oops.
We already know that a good portion of those won't be suitable after interviews, backgrounds, etc, and by this time some will have lost interest, been hired elsewhere, etc.
This means you need to give a new test to take care of the remaining openings.
When you lower the criteria to pass the original written test, some, or all, of those positions will be filled with people who failed, and a new test won't be given as soon. It won't be that many additional people because a lot will get weeded out and you're already at the bottom of the list. The consequences aren't
that severe. The principle is the problem; we don't lower the psychological, medical, background, or polygraph standards, why lower the academic ones? (I won't speak to the PT standards which are wildly variable and in some cases, appallingly low.)