The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently issued guidance to four police and fire departments, labeling their basic math requirements as “discriminatory.” According to the DOJ, expecting employees to demonstrate basic math proficiency may have a disparate impact on minority candidates. The agency argues that this expectation can disproportionately affect certain racial groups, creating an unfair barrier to employment.
But this raises the question—how low are we willing to set the bar for first responders? In life-or-death situations, whether it’s a burning building or an active crime scene, precision and quick thinking are non-negotiable. We rely on these professionals to act with clear judgment, and yes, basic math skills are a part of that. For example, firefighters use math to calculate water pressure, and police officers need it for accident reconstruction or managing resources during critical operations.
The DOJ claims that requiring these skills could reduce diversity within these departments, sparking a heated debate. On one side, you have advocates of lowering standards to ensure inclusivity, while others argue that such a move compromises public safety and undervalues the importance of competence in critical jobs. It’s worth asking: where do we draw the line between diversity and the fundamental skills necessary to serve and protect?
Imagine being a citizen whose life depends on a firefighter calculating the correct water pressure for a hose or a police officer using math to estimate skid marks at a crash site. These aren’t just nice-to-have skills—they are essential tools of the trade. Lowering the bar might fill positions, but it could come at a high cost. In fields where precision can mean life or death, do we really want to gamble on that?
There’s no denying the importance of diversity in all fields, including law enforcement and emergency services. However, isn’t it more important to ensure that every first responder—no matter their background—has the same baseline competence? Inclusivity should not mean sacrificing public safety.
The DOJ’s actions suggest that it’s better to adjust the standard to accommodate differences rather than ensuring all applicants meet the requirements. It’s an approach that, while well-intentioned, might not be the best move for the long-term safety and efficiency of first responder teams. Public trust in law enforcement and emergency services hinges on their ability to perform under pressure, and those skills, like basic math, are non-negotiable.
In the end, while promoting diversity is a goal we should all strive for, we must not forget that the safety of the public, and the lives of those first responders, should come first. It’s a debate that will likely continue, but the balance between inclusivity and competence is one that we can’t afford to get wrong.
