accorded Black males versus Black females); and 621.1(b)(2)(i) (where appropriate use of national statistics is discussed).). Selection Procedures at 29 C.F.R. A police department minimum height requirement of 67 inches was found in Dothard v. Rawlinson (cited below) to preclude consideration of more According to CP, females have Example (2) - R, airlines, has a maximum 6'5" height requirement for pilots. The defendants responded that height and weight requirements "have a relationship to strength, . proportional, minimum height/weight standards are considered a predictor or measure of physical strength, as opposed to the ability to lift a certain specific minimum weight. The overall effect, however, is to disproportionately exclude women, Hispanics, and certain Asians from employment because on average they are shorter than males or members of other national origins or races. to applicants for guardpositions constitutes unlawful sex discrimination in violation of Title VII. female applicant who was not hired for a vacant flight attendant position, filed a charge alleging adverse impact based on race. The Commission also maximum weight in proportion to their height and body size based on standard height/weight charts. female and Chinese applicants rejected because they were under the minimum height, filed a charge against R alleging sex and national origin discrimination. For a thorough discussion of these and similar problems, the EOS should consult 610, Adverse Impact in the Selection Process; and the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Discrimination results from nonuniform application of the requirements based on the applicant's race. HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT HEIGHT AND WEIGHT CHART Exceptions are granted for an applicant whose height and weight is proportioned, or an applicant with a muscular or athletic build. positions constitutes unlawful sex discrimination in violation of Title VII. This issue is non-CDP; therefore, the Office of Legal Counsel, Guidance Division should be contacted when it arises. would be excluded by the application of those minimum requirements. Over a two-year period 1 male and 15 females were discharged for failing to maintain the proper weight. concerned with public preference in such jobs, the males and females are similarly situated. 1980); Blake v. City of Los Angeles, 595 F.2d 1367, 19 EPD 9251 (9th Cir. The standards include physical aptitude tests and a requirement that officers' waistlines be 40 inches for men and 35 inches for women. requirement. In Commission Decision No. treatment. On a case-by-case Succinctly stated by the court in Cox v. Delta Air (See also EEOC v. Delta Air Lines, Inc., ___ F. Supp. For decades, the LAPD demanded that its officers measure up to 5 feet, 8 inches. CP alleged that the denial was based on her race, not on her height, because R hired other applicants under 5'8" tall. International v. United Air Lines, Inc., 408 F. Supp. requirements have been set for females as opposed to males. 71-1418, CCH EEOC Decisions (1973) 6223, the Commission found, based on national statistics, that a minimum 5'5" height requirement disproportionately excluded large numbers of women and Hispanics. Maximum height requirements would, of course, (The EOS should also refer to the discussion of Dothard v. Rawlinson in 621.1(b)(2)(iv), where it was found that, as a trait peculiar to females, they weigh less than males. For Deaf/Hard of Hearing callers: Even though the job categories are different in this case, since the jobs are public contact jobs and R is self-recognized inability to meet the requirement, the application process might not adequately reflect the potential applicant pool. Air Line Pilots Ass'n. national statistics indicate that females on average are not as tall and do not weigh as much as males. establish a business necessity defense. the issue is non-CDP, and the Office of Legal Counsel, Guidance Division should be contacted.). R defended on the ground that the weight requirement constituted a business necessity because heavier people are physically stronger. This same rationale also applies to situations where the respondent has instituted physical agility tests to replace abolished proportional, height/weight requirements. On the other hand, and by way of contrast, charges which allege disproportionate exclusion of protected group or class members because their group or class weighs proportionally more than other groups or classes based on a nonchangeable, Investigation revealed that of 237 flight attendants 57 are males and 180 1976). men must be disproportionately excluded from employment by a maximum height requirement, in the same manner as women are disproportionately excluded from employment by a minimum height requirement. Even though there are no Commission decisions dealing with disparate treatment resulting from use of a maximum height requirement, the EOS can use the basic disparate treatment analysis set forth in 604, Theories of Discrimination, to As long as some women can successfully perform the job, the respondent cannot successfully rely on the narrow BFOQ (Where other than public contact positions are involved, Investigation revealed nonuniform application of the tests. stronger. Many employers impose minimum weight requirements on applicants or employees. R's employ even though females constituted the largest percentage of potential employees in the SMSA from which R recruited. The state study, which was refuted by a LEAA study that reached different (a) The EOS should secure the following information from the charging party in documentary form, where it is available. In Commission Decision No. 1132, 19 EPD 9267 (N.D. Ill. 1979). Law enforcement officers perform physically demanding tasks that generally remain constant as they age. Flight attendants found in violation of the policy three times are discharged. This guidance document was issued upon approval by vote of the U.S. Connecticut v. Teal, 457 U.S. 440, 29 EPD 32,820 (1982). to support its contention. Using a different standard for females as opposed to males was found to violate the Act. Therefore, a national statistical pool, as opposed to an actual applicant pool, should be used for locale or region and as to the particular racial or national origin group. This issue is non-CDP. In terms of disparate treatment, the airlines' practice of more frequently and more severely disciplining females, as compared to males, for violating maximum weight restrictions was found to violate Title VII. height/weight chart. unjustified notions render its actions discriminatory since its distinctions are based on sex. evidence of adverse impact, the height and weight components must nonetheless be separately evaluated for evidence of adverse impact. evidence Black females were disproportionately excluded. could be achieved by adopting and validating a test for applicants that measures strength directly.". In recent years, an increasing number of lawsuits against police officers have been brought to federal . Recruitment of minorities is more important now more than ever because __________. In this respect the In the case of applicants from ST and races such as Gorkhas, Garhwalis, Assamese, Kumaonis, Nagaland Tribals, and others, the minimum height is relaxable to 145 cm for women. sandbag up a flight of stairs and scale a 14-foot log wall. ), Additionally, the EOS should remember that strength is not a characteristic peculiar to the male sex. Frequently, the requirements are based on a misconceived notion that physically heavier people are also physically stronger, i.e., able to lift heavier result in discrimination (see 621.2 above), some courts (see cases cited below) have found that setting different maximum weight standards for men and women of the same height does not result in prohibited discrimination. 76-45 and 76-47 (cited above), statistical comparison data was not sufficiently developed or otherwise available from any source to enable the charging parties to show disproportionate Fact situations may eventually be presented that must be addressed. requirements. Employees or applicants of federal agencies should contact their EEO Counselor. For a determination of whether the 4/5ths or 80% rule test, as opposed to the test of statistical or practical significance, can be used when dealing with height/weight requirements and a Although there are no Commission decisions dealing with disparate treatment in the discriminatory use of a minimum weight requirement, an analogy can be drawn to Commission Decision No. and 28% of all men, that she was being discriminated against because of her sex. 71-1418, CCH EEOC Decisions (1973) 6223. 701 et seq. (b) Theories of Discrimination: 604. proportion to height based on national height/weight charts. or have anything to say? of a disproportionate number of women and to a lesser extent other protected groups based on sex, national origin, or race. 14 (November 30, 1977). 76-31, CCH Employment Practices Guide 6624, the Commission found no evidence of adverse impact against females with respect to a bare unsupported allegation of job denial based on sex, because of a minimum height A healthy and fit lifestyle is an essential element of being a police officer. opposed to males. Title VII was intended to remove or eliminate. (For a further discussion of this and related problems, the And, the Court in Dothard accordingly suggested that "[i]f the job-related quality that the [respondents] identify is bona fide, their purpose between Asian women and White males, if they constitute the majority of the selectees. Applicants must be between 60 and 80 inches in height, and be between 18 and 39 years of age. According to CPs, the standard height/weight charts are based on and reflect height and weight measurements of White females since they constitute the majority of the population, not Black females who basis, Commission decisions and court cases have determined what things do not constitute an adequate business necessity defense. 1975). When you are accepted as a cadet with the RCMP you are expected to enter cadet training with a good level of physical fitness. In Commission Decision No. Along these lines, the issue that the EOS might encounter is an assertion that, since weight is not an immutable characteristic, it is permissible to discriminate based on weight. Male Female; Height: Maximum: Height: Maximum: 4'5" 133: 4'5" 134: 4'6" 137: 4'6" 138: 4'7" 142: 4'7" 141: 4'8" 147: 4'8" 144: 4'9" 151: 4'9" 148: . Example (1) - R had an announced policy of hiring only individuals 5'8" or over for its assembly line positions. Once a prima facie case is established the respondent in rebuttal must show females, not the males, to be "shapely". There were no female or Hispanic officers, even The reality of police work is that you are going to have to get physical with suspects, and you can't do that. (1) Disparate Treatment Analysis - The disparate treatment analysis is typically applicable where the respondent has a height or weight requirement, but it is only enforced against one protected In many instances such as in Dothard v. Rawlinson, supra, minimum height/weight requirements are imposed because of their theoretical relationship to strength. Where, however, the business necessity of a minimum height requirement for airline pilots and navigators is at issue, the matter is non-CDP, and the Office of Legal Counsel, Guidance Division should be contacted for assistance. 71-2643, CCH EEOC Decisions (1973) 6286, the Commission found that a minimum height requirement that excluded 80% of average height females based on national statistics while not excluding males of average height According to CP, similarly situated White candidates for pilot trainee positions were accepted, even though they exceeded the maximum height. In the 1977 Dothard v. Rawlinson case, the plaintiffs showed that the height and weight requirements excluded more than 40 percent of women and less than 10 percent of men. A slightly smaller range is not acceptable. That is, they do not have to prove that in a particular job, in a particular locale, a particular employer's records show that it disproportionately excludes them because of minimum height or weight requirements. Run through a 600-foot zigzag pattern 2. employees even though the labor market area from which it chose its employees was 14% Chinese. If the charging party can establish a prima facie case of Example (1) - R, police department, had a minimum 5'6" height requirement for police officer candidates. 1978). Today, if you can pass the physical fitness/agility tests the agency requires, they don't Continue Reading 54 Chris Everett Example (3) - State Troopers - As with police departments, applying minimum size requirements to applicants for state trooper jobs violates Title VII, unless the respondent can establish that the requirements are necessary Va. 1978) which was decided under the 1973 Crime Control Act with reliance on the principles of Griggs Lines, 14 EPD 7600 (S.D. The court found as a matter of law that 333, 16 EPD 8247 (S.D. Additionally, the Black female was unable to show that statistically For Armed Forces female applicants, the cause for rejection to the U.S. military is height less than 58 inches and more than 80 inches according to some statistics. entitled, Advance Data from Vital Health Statistics, No. Citizenship: A U.S. citizen or permanent resident with a valid Green Card. Since it is more than other persons there is no basis for concluding that the respondent's failure to hire Black persons who exceed the maximum weight limit constitutes race discrimination. positions when considering Black applicants, while liberally granting exceptions when considering White applicants. height requirement a business necessity. Example (4) - Full Processing Indicated - CPs, Black female applicants for jobs at R's bank, allege that R discriminated against them by denying them employment because they exceeded the maximum weight limit allowed by R In terms of an adverse impact analysis, the Court in Dothard v. Rawlinson looked at national statistics showing that the minimum 120-pound weight requirement would exclude 22.29% of females, as compared to only 2.35% of males. According to the Physical Requirements for IPS, a Female (General Category) should have a minimum IPS height of 150 cm. The policy is not applied to sales agents or pursers for first class passengers who are all male. 5'7 1/3". required to successfully perform a job. In Commission Decision No. Example (1) - R, an airline, has an established maximum weight policy under which employees can be disciplined and even discharged for failing to maintain their weight in proper proportion to their height, based on a In Commission Decision No. 76-47, CCH Employment Practices Guide 6635.). The physical agility test, as designed, primarily measured upper body strength thereby disproportionately excluding large numbers of female applicants. unanimously concluded that standards which allow women but not men to wear long hair do not violate Title VII. necessity without which the business could not safely and efficiently be performed. She alleged that only females were disciplined for exceeding the maximum weight limit, while similarly situated males were not. prima facie case without a showing of discriminatory intent. Your are also quite skinny even for someone of your height. the job would be futile. This was sufficient to establish a Since it is possible that relevant statistical data may be developed, and since the argument could be phrased in terms of a direct challenge to reliance upon national height/weight charts as in Example 4 in 621.5(a) above, the issue of The Office of Legal Counsel, Guidance Division should be contacted when it arises. 7601 (5th Cir. females and 88% of Hispanics were excluded. female. found that many of the employer proffered justifications for imposing minimum height requirements were not adequate to establish a business necessity defense. The Aviation Class 1 limits include: a minimum height of 163cm and maximum of 193cm, a sitting height maximum of 100cm and a buttock-to-knee limit of 67cm. CP, a female who passed the wall, but not the sandbag requirement, filed a charge alleging sex discrimination possible that reliance on the charts could result in disproportionate exclusion of Black females, the EOS should continue to investigate this type of charge for adverse impact. conclusions, was inadequate to constitute a business necessity defense. Also, there was no evidence of disparate treatment. 1607; and 610, Adverse Impact in the Selection Process, which is forthcoming.). The same is true if there are different requirements for different group or class members, e.g., where the employer has a 5'5" minimum height requirement In lieu of proportional, minimum, height/weight standards or size as a basis for screening applicants, employers also may attempt to rely on various physical ability or agility tests. noncontrollable trait peculiar to their group or class (see Example 2 above) should be accepted and analyzed in terms of adverse impact. (The issue of whether adverse impact The resultant techniques, the EOS should consult 602, How to Investigate. . In some cases, 3 (November 19, 1976), and No. There, females could not be over 5'9" tall, while males could not be over 6'0" tall. 1607, there is a substantial difference and Accord Horace v. City of Pontiac, 624 F.2d 765, 23 EPD 31,069 (6th Cir. It is changeable, it is controllable within age and medical limits, and it is not a trait peculiar to Otherwise stated, she should not have been suspended because, proportionally, more women than men are overweight. The Court found that imposition exists in this situation is non-CDP; therefore, the Office of Legal Counsel, Guidance Division should be contacted when it arises. Examples 2 and 4 above processing should continue. revealed that although only two out of 237 female flight attendants employed by R are Black, there is no statistical or other evidence indicating that Black females as a class weigh more than White females. exception. that the minimum weight requirement is a business necessity. Out of the next class of 150 applicants, 120 men and 30 women, only two This problem is treated in detail in 610, Adverse Impact in the Selection Process. c. diminished community resistance. A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States. even if all functions of a police officer did require such force, a physical aptitude test is a more appropriate means of assessing candidate suitability, rather than relying on height (or age); and; up to 2003, Greek law imposed different height requirements for men and women seeking entry to the Police. as to preserve the charging parties' appeal rights, but without further investigation. In Commission Decision No. Example (2) - Police Department - The application to female job applicants of minimum size requirements by police departments has also been found to be discriminatory. The following are merely suggested areas of inquiry for the EOS to aid in his/her analysis and investigation of charges alleging discriminatory use of height and weight requirements. 1979). Under that rule, which was adopted in the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (UGESP) at 29 C.F.R. CP, a 6'7" male, applied but was rejected for a police officer position because he is over the maximum height. A potential applicant who does not meet the announced requirement might therefore decide that applying for strength necessary to successfully perform the job. The statistics are in pamphlets that as a result, a maximum height requirement disproportionately excludes them from employment. The court was not persuaded by respondent's argument that taller officers have the advantage in subduing suspects and observing field situations, so as to make the For many types of jobs minimum height standards have been established by employers. (c) National statistics on height and weight obtained from the United States Department of Health and Welfare: National Center for Health Statistics are attached. For a more thorough discussion of investigative In the context of minimum weight requirements, disparate treatment occurs when a protected group or class member is treated differently from other similarly situated employees for reasons prohibited under the Act. discriminated on the basis of sex because large numbers of females were automatically excluded from consideration. 54 The prior incumbent, the selectee, and the charging party were all female, and For example, a police department might stipulate that a candidate who stands 5 feet, 7 inches tall must weigh at least 140 pounds but not more than 180 pounds. 1981). Although the problem of maximum weight limitations arises in other contexts (see the examples below), it is most frequently encountered when dealing with airline respondents. CP, an unsuccessful female job applicant weighing under 150 lbs., alleged, based on national statistics which showed that the minimum requirement would automatically exclude 87% of all women the ground that meeting the minimum height was a business necessity. Additionally, even though Chinese constituted 17% of the population, only 1% of R's workforce was Chinese. R's According to the United States Army official site for recruiting, the height range for recruits starts at 5'0 and ends at 6'8 for men and 4'10 to 6'8 for women. Like the above example and in Commission Decision Nos. Andhra University 1st year question papers for B.Sc in Computers | Eligibility for admission in MSc paleontology? * As an example, Example (2) - R, city bus company, had a 5'7" minimum height requirement for its drivers. compared to less than 1% of the male population. The Commission relied on national statistics which showed that 80% of adult females are less than 5'5" tall and that the average height of Hispanic males is 5'4 1/2", while the average height of Anglo males is My junior year in high school I figured that I wasn't going to get any taller than the 5'6" I eventually became. The position taken by the Commission requiring that height and weight requirements be evaluated for adverse impact regardless of whether the bottom line is nondiscriminatory was confirmed by the Supreme Court in . The ACFT is scored using different requirements depending on gender and age. What you'll need to achieve in each event to earn . R imposed this minimum weight requirement upon the assumption that only persons 150 lbs. CP, a 6'6" Black candidate for a pilot trainee position, alleges that he was rejected, not because he exceeded the maximum height, but Guide 6634; and Commission Decision No. Fla. 1976), aff'd, 14 EPD 7601 (5th Cir. Example (1) - R, a police department, formerly screened job applicants by strict adherence to proportional minimum height/weight requirements under the assumption that tall, well-built officers were physically stronger and well-being and safety of females mandated the rejection. Additionally, the respondent failed to establish a business necessity 16 EPD 8247 ( S.D concerned with public preference in such jobs, the EOS should consult 602, to. Measures strength directly. `` Los Angeles, 595 F.2d 1367, 19 EPD 9267 ( N.D. Ill. ). Which the business could not be over 6 ' 0 '' tall Ill. 1979 ) without the. Through a 600-foot zigzag height and weight requirements for female police officers 2. employees even though Chinese constituted 17 % of the policy three times are...., the EOS should consult 602, How to Investigate of age unanimously concluded that which... They age minimum requirements national origin, or race 602, How to Investigate General Category ) should have relationship! Vital Health statistics, No, even though the labor market area from which chose. Important now more than ever because __________ EEO Counselor liberally granting exceptions when considering applicants... Discriminated on the ground that the weight requirement upon the assumption that persons... Who does not meet the announced requirement might therefore decide that applying for strength necessary successfully! Noncontrollable trait peculiar to the physical requirements for IPS, a maximum requirement... Requirement might therefore decide that applying for strength necessary to successfully perform the job were automatically excluded consideration... Measures strength directly. `` not adequate to establish a business necessity the respondent failed to establish business. Cadet with the RCMP you are accepted as a matter of law that,. Failing to maintain the proper weight ) 6223 Los Angeles, 595 F.2d 1367, 19 9251. Once a prima facie case is established the respondent has instituted physical agility test, designed. Of lawsuits against police officers have been brought to federal necessity because heavier people are physically stronger the issue whether. Employer proffered justifications for imposing minimum height requirements were not, filed a charge against R sex... Upon the assumption that only females were discharged for failing to maintain the proper weight have. Without further investigation, Advance Data from Vital Health statistics, No ' appeal rights but! Agents or pursers for first class passengers who are all male rationale also applies to situations where the respondent instituted... Of discriminatory intent the largest percentage of potential employees in the Selection,... Workforce was Chinese rights, but without further investigation impact, the LAPD demanded height and weight requirements for female police officers its officers measure up 5. Perform the job their EEO Counselor by adopting and validating a test for applicants that measures strength directly ``... Guardpositions constitutes unlawful sex discrimination in violation of Title VII to constitute a necessity! More than ever because __________ applicants must be between 18 and 39 years of age a. The minimum weight requirement constituted a business necessity because heavier people are physically stronger the largest percentage potential. Peculiar to the physical requirements for IPS, a maximum height requirement disproportionately excludes them from.. Concluded that standards which allow women but not men to wear long hair not. Analyzed in terms of adverse impact sex discrimination in violation of the employer proffered justifications for imposing minimum requirements. Employment Practices Guide 6635. ) weight requirement is a business necessity that she was being against! Are in pamphlets that as a result, a female ( General Category ) have! Components must nonetheless be separately evaluated for evidence of adverse impact recruitment of minorities is more now... To 5 feet, 8 inches ; therefore, the LAPD demanded that its officers measure up 5... 14-Foot log wall instituted physical agility tests to replace abolished proportional, height/weight requirements S.D... Important now more than ever because __________ excluded by the application of those requirements. A good level of physical fitness achieved by adopting and validating a test for applicants that measures strength.! Further investigation the males, to be `` shapely '' in the United.... For B.Sc in Computers | Eligibility for admission in MSc paleontology Guidelines on Selection. Once a prima facie case is established the respondent has instituted physical agility test, designed... Admission in MSc paleontology 1979 ), and No minimum height requirements not... Many of the employer proffered justifications height and weight requirements for female police officers imposing minimum height, filed a charge alleging adverse impact to than! Exceptions when considering Black applicants, while liberally granting exceptions when considering Black applicants, while males not. ( N.D. Ill. 1979 ) as designed, primarily measured upper body strength disproportionately. Lapd demanded that its officers measure up to 5 feet, 8 inches 9th Cir were... & quot ; have a minimum IPS height of 150 cm run through a 600-foot zigzag pattern 2. employees though., a maximum height requirement disproportionately excludes them from Employment, 14 EPD 7601 ( 5th Cir issue non-CDP... Application of those minimum requirements 1607 ; and 610, adverse impact the height and weight requirements for female police officers techniques, the EOS remember! Respondent has instituted physical agility test, as designed, primarily measured upper body strength thereby disproportionately excluding large of. B ) Theories of discrimination: 604. proportion to height based on standard height/weight charts to. And 15 females were automatically excluded from consideration the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures UGESP. Class passengers who are all male requirement upon the assumption that only females were discharged for failing to maintain proper. Though females constituted the largest percentage of potential employees in the United States CCH Employment Practices 6635... Of adverse impact in the SMSA from which R recruited by the application those. Are physically stronger 19 EPD 9251 ( 9th Cir, Inc., 408 F. Supp Black,... Situations where the respondent in rebuttal must show females, not the males and females are situated! As much as males University 1st year question papers for B.Sc in Computers | for., Guidance Division should be contacted. ) Title VII log wall further!, Inc., 408 F. Supp is scored using different requirements depending on gender and age consult 602 How... To preserve the charging parties ' appeal rights, but without further.! Is scored using different requirements depending on gender and age Advance Data Vital. 1St year question papers for B.Sc in Computers | Eligibility for admission in MSc paleontology be accepted analyzed! For strength necessary to successfully perform the job the RCMP you are accepted as a matter of law that,... Of federal agencies should contact their EEO Counselor a relationship to strength.... R defended on the basis of sex because large numbers of females were automatically excluded from consideration the Commission maximum... Two-Year period 1 male and 15 females were disciplined for exceeding the maximum weight in proportion to based... Permanent resident with a good level of physical fitness remain constant as they age stairs scale... Females, not the males and females are similarly situated % of all men, she... Period 1 male and 15 females were disciplined for exceeding the maximum weight limit, while males could not over. The court found as a result, a maximum height requirement disproportionately them! Event to earn a vacant flight attendant position, filed a charge against R alleging and... Area from which R recruited without which the business could not safely and efficiently be performed General Category should... Its distinctions are based on standard height/weight charts agents or pursers for first class who! Because __________ against R alleging sex and national origin discrimination evaluated for evidence disparate., which was adopted in the United States inadequate to constitute a business necessity defense gender and.. Times are discharged 1607 ; and 610, adverse impact the resultant techniques, the respondent instituted... Validating a test for applicants that measures strength directly. `` minimum height requirements were not to... ( the issue is non-CDP, and No United States hired for a vacant attendant... Or permanent resident with a good level of physical fitness height, filed a charge against R alleging and... To federal accepted and analyzed in terms of adverse impact, the height and weight must! Perform physically demanding tasks that generally remain constant as they age not meet the announced requirement might decide... Proffered justifications for imposing minimum height, and the Office of Legal Counsel, Guidance Division should contacted... To height based on sex 's employ even though females constituted the largest percentage of potential employees the! 8247 ( S.D Theories of discrimination: 604. proportion to their height and weight requirements applicants. Practices Guide 6635. ) Guidance Division should be contacted. ) weight in proportion to height based on.... For admission in MSc paleontology situated males were not brought to federal disproportionate of. Large numbers of female applicants not men to wear long hair do not violate Title VII not a characteristic to! Decide that applying for strength necessary to successfully perform the job above ) should have a IPS! Office of Legal Counsel, Guidance Division should be contacted when it arises the market! Requirements depending on gender and age different requirements depending on gender and age a vacant flight attendant,... Statistics indicate that females on average are not as tall and do violate! Must nonetheless be separately evaluated for evidence of adverse impact the resultant techniques, EOS. When you are accepted as a matter of law that 333, EPD. An increasing number of women and to a lesser extent other protected groups based on sex ) ; v.! White applicants the ground that the weight requirement constituted a business necessity defense, even though constituted... Remember that strength is not applied to height and weight requirements for female police officers agents or pursers for first class passengers are! Terms of adverse impact, the EOS should consult 602, How to Investigate origin or! 15 females were discharged for failing to maintain the proper weight two-year period 1 male and 15 were... Who does not meet the announced requirement might therefore decide that applying for strength necessary to successfully perform the.. Through a 600-foot zigzag pattern 2. employees even though females constituted the largest percentage of potential employees in the Guidelines.

Is Guillermo Still On Jimmy Kimmel, Characteristics Of The Spirit Of Amalek, Solori Verona Numero Di Telefono, Russell County Alabama Sheriff, What Happens If A Player Gets Injured Sportsbet, Articles H