Like Tree289Likes

Thread: Chicago Fire Exam, March 2006

  1. #6951
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Dalsh and everyone else interested here is the oral arguments from 3/29/11 with 7th District court of appeals. they lay into both sides mainly the city though.

    http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/781033NU.mp3

  2. #6952
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    204

    Default

    FYI to those that have to change address with the CFD. Change has to now be made in person at 1338 S. Clinton. According to Commander Ignacio (sp?) too many problems came from mail requests.

  3. #6953
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ILFFPM View Post
    Dalsh and everyone else interested here is the oral arguments from 3/29/11 with 7th District court of appeals. they lay into both sides mainly the city though.

    http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/781033NU.mp3
    Well done ILFFPM.

  4. #6954
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    204

    Default

    That's the city lawyer? HE DOESN'T KNOW HOW THE CITY HIRED FROM LIST?

  5. #6955
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by keefus View Post
    That's the city lawyer? HE DOESN'T KNOW HOW THE CITY HIRED FROM LIST?
    The lawyer from the city is the woman. There is more then one judge in the room that was responding/asking questions. The lawyer for the plaintiff is a man.


    It sounds like the city has a chance..
    Last edited by blue2520; 04-21-2011 at 09:21 PM.

  6. #6956
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ilffpm View Post
    dalsh and everyone else interested here is the oral arguments from 3/29/11 with 7th district court of appeals. They lay into both sides mainly the city though.

    http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/781033nu.mp3
    thanks buddy... Great listen its seems close

  7. #6957
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    507

    Default

    Thank you very much ILFFPM.

    Just listened and I will tell you that the city attorney is certainly better prepared and much more articulate and that often goes a long way in the courtroom, however it doesn't always.

    Please keep in mind that the Plaintiff in any case has an obligation to prove their "charges," which is what the city is stating was not done.

    The problem, which I knew years ago is that the city basically put all of their eggs in one basket with their SOL claim. They did not defend the list or their practices and solely argued that the plaintiff's claims were too late.

    Both parties did a poor job though in general. The plaintiff could have better proved the disparate impact specifically to the use of the list and the city could have drawn up add'l defenses.

    Now it comes down to the court's opinion as to whether the city's creation of the well qualified list was the cutoff point in which the plaintiff's were notified they were rejected or if the court feels that the city violated it with every class they hired and thus the plaintiffs are within the SOL.

    I think the city should win based on the arguments and lack of proof by the plaintiff, but I also know that the courts opinion may be swayed/biased based on the fact that this is a discrimination case and it's well known of the discrimination in the CFD, not necessarily today, but historically.

  8. #6958
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    198

    Default

    i see all of these numbers like 850 people just over 30+ years. I realize there is a list in play right now, however, correct me if i'm wrong, but that list is from 2006. With all of these people approaching retirement, will there be another process in the future? and if so can anyone give an educated guess as to when it would approx take place? thanks.
    -Firefighting is a lifestyle NOT a career-

  9. #6959
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    478

    Default

    I really don't think the city is in a hurry to do anything right now.
    Last edited by harrynuts; 11-07-2013 at 10:39 PM.

  10. #6960
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    391

    Default

    I Agree unless rahm has some reason to want a retest i can't seeit happening soon at all you could be 19 at time of test so guys are still in earlier mid twentys or so and there not hiring any way plus the possible law suit class. So if i had to bet id say a few more years yet.

  11. #6961
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveKiefer View Post
    i see all of these numbers like 850 people just over 30+ years. I realize there is a list in play right now, however, correct me if i'm wrong, but that list is from 2006. With all of these people approaching retirement, will there be another process in the future? and if so can anyone give an educated guess as to when it would approx take place? thanks.
    This question has been asked and responded to numerous times in this forum and nobody has any information regarding when a new test will be. Nobody even knows when they are going to hire again, let alone test again. All we know is that historically, they test once per decade (1985, 1995, 2006)

  12. #6962
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    198

    Default

    thanks. what wierd trends.
    -Firefighting is a lifestyle NOT a career-

  13. #6963
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveKiefer View Post
    thanks. what wierd trends.
    The last two times the city tested in 95 and 06, the city said they would begin testing more frequently, but I don't see it happening. When you have 25 thousand + people come out for the exam, you create a pretty long standing list.

  14. #6964
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    255

    Default

    And when you keep putting the process on hold it takes even longer to weed them out... lol

  15. #6965
    MembersZone Subscriber

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    198

    Default

    lol. yeah it's probably a pretty painful wait i'd imagine.
    -Firefighting is a lifestyle NOT a career-

  16. #6966
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    478

    Default

    Maybe these retro checks will facilitate a little movement in the CFD

  17. #6967
    Forum Member
    Shadez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    364

    Default

    I spoke with my source over the Easter holiday and he said word in the fire house was a class will happen at some point this year and for me to keep my eyes peeled for a letter in the mail. My response was I took the PAT in January 2010 so I'm 2 classes and possibly a 3rd class away from getting any letter. Like some have said previously, he also said there are rumblings of a new test coming too. I asked about the law suit group and he said the word is they won't be starting or getting into any classes soon.

    That's it for now till I hear the next rumor.

  18. #6968
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ILFFPM View Post
    Dalsh and everyone else interested here is the oral arguments from 3/29/11 with 7th District court of appeals. they lay into both sides mainly the city though.

    http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/tmp/781033NU.mp3
    I'm no legal expert here, but what exactly will the city gain by these oral arguments? The supreme court has ordered things be done a certain way, and in a certain timeframe. How can the city deviate from this? I didn't think it was possible for the city to buy any time on this case

  19. #6969
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    289

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by harrynuts View Post
    I'm no legal expert here, but what exactly will the city gain by these oral arguments? The supreme court has ordered things be done a certain way, and in a certain timeframe. How can the city deviate from this? I didn't think it was possible for the city to buy any time on this case
    All the Supreme Court did was agree that every time the test was used re-started the clock on filing this lawsuit. They did not award any penalty or even signal that one should be given. They remanded the case back to the appeals court in Chicago (who before the apeal went to Washington awarded the city victory) for "Futher Questions" and final judgement/award. This case is not over and they have won nothing other than the Supreme Court saying that each time the city pulled from the list the clock reset.
    Last edited by blue2520; 04-28-2011 at 12:55 AM.

  20. #6970
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blue2520 View Post
    All the Supreme Court did was agree that every time the test was used re-started the clock on filing this lawsuit. They did not award any penalty or even signal that one should be given. They remanded the case back to the appeals court in Chicago (who before the apeal went to Washington awarded the city victory) for "Futher Questions" and final judgement/award. This case is not over and they have won nothing other than the Supreme Court saying that each time the city pulled from the list the clock reset.
    Correct. This is a very simplistic summary of the case.

    Lewis (minorities) sues Chicago and wins in the district court and is awarded a judgment. City appeals decision stating that the suit was filed outside the 300 day statute of limitations and wins. Lewis appeals that decision to the Supreme court stating each time the list was used, a new 300 day clock was started and Supreme Court agrees and remands back to appellate court.

    My opinion is that the judgment will be modified, bc even the Supreme court found that the first round of hiring would be outside the SOL if it's 300 days from every time the list was used, therefore the judgment should be modified to reflect that. I don't see the court reversing the judgment though, b/c that would go against the Supreme court seeing as the city's only argument was the SOL angle.

  21. #6971
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    16

    Default

    So in my spare time I decided to read through this whole thread to see what was going on. I just wanted to post and say I am really pulling for all you guys to get on soon. Its ridiculous to read about the lawsuit and all the other stuff you guys have had to wait through the last few years.

    Anyway, just wanted to let you guys know you have people rooting for you.

    Good luck and stay safe.

  22. #6972
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Just a thought here, i watched an interview with mr.emanuel and he was saying pension reform is a pressing issue, if he intends to push it through soon or try at least. they may put a class through to offset the wave of retirements that would almost surely happen prior to legislation passing. What do you fellas think.

  23. #6973
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    391

    Default

    Just Heard a rumor of no class till next year hopefully not true.

  24. #6974
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    478

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ILFFPM View Post
    Just a thought here, i watched an interview with mr.emanuel and he was saying pension reform is a pressing issue, if he intends to push it through soon or try at least. they may put a class through to offset the wave of retirements that would almost surely happen prior to legislation passing. What do you fellas think.
    I think since the contract has been settled, and retro checks have been distributed, you will see more retirements in 2011 than you will in the next coming years (2012-2016). The mayor can say what he wants, but this contract has posed no threat to any CFD pensions and until it's agreed upon in contract form, I don't see anyone running for the doors.

  25. #6975
    Forum Member

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    507

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ILFFPM View Post
    Just Heard a rumor of no class till next year hopefully not true.
    I heard a rumor of a class starting within 60 days of Rahm's swearing in, which takes place two weeks from today and then a second class to begin immediately after that class.

    The guy I talked to said this is all politics, so that Rahm can be the guy that signed off on it and shakes the commisioner's hand.

    Again, just a rumor and ILFFPM heard the opposite, so really nobody knows anything, I just obviously hope my rumor is true and ILFFPM is false. I do agree though that we will know nothing until Rahm gets in office, which I have said before.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. World Of Fire Report: 03-19-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-21-2005, 11:02 PM
  2. World Of Fire Report: 03-15-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-18-2005, 08:15 AM
  3. World Of Fire Report: 03-09-05
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-10-2005, 07:41 PM
  4. World Of Fire Report: 03-29-04
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-30-2004, 10:52 PM
  5. World Of Fire Report: 03-28-04
    By PaulBrown in forum World of Fire Daily Report
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-29-2004, 09:25 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Log in

Click here to log in or register