Implementing health and fitness programs for firefighters.

When the ADEA was amended in 1986, whether or not public safety officers should fall within the protection of the ADEA was put on hold until a review by Congress in 1993. In preparation for the review, the EEOC contracted with the Center for Applied Behavioral Sciences (CABS) at Pennsylvania State

University to determine if public safety would be compromised by barring mandatory retirement based on chronological age for public safety jobs. The investigation revealed that age is a poor predictor of job performance among public safety officers. Physical fitness and mental abilities showed the strongest relationship with performance and these characteristics vary greatly across individuals regardless of age. The report recommends that mandatory retirement be eliminated, and that public safety departments adopt physical and psychological tests for retirement evaluations instead. This is consistent with earlier research that found age to be a poor predictor of performance across the full range of employment years.(1)

The Executive Director of the American Association of Retired Persons (AARP) endorsed the report citing "retirement policies based on chronological age do not take into account individual difference and are discriminatory on their face."(2) However, there is disagreement among public safety groups in regard to the report's conclusions. Some public safety unions sought a permanent exemption contending that forced retirement was justified by the physical demands of these jobs.(3) At this time, legislation designed to make the public safety exemption permanent was passed by the House of Representatives (H.R. 2722) but the Senate adjourned without passing the bill, allowing the exemption to expire. Presently, there is not a federal law allowing jurisdictions to apply a maximum hiring or mandatory retirement age for public safety positions. However, employers can still attempt to show that age is a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) reasonably necessary to the normal operation of the police or fire department.(4)

Previous research by Pynes found that the elimination of the mandatory retirement exemption would not impact the recruitment, testing, and retirement patterns in a large urban municipal fire department. Most of the firefighters in the Pynes research retired prior to 60 years of age and 30 years of service, making the compulsory retirement provision unnecessary. In fact, only a very small number of firefighters (34 out of 424) retired at age 60 or older. Out of the number that retired at age 60 or older, nine (26%) were in the promotional ranks. Only 14 firefighters retired serving 30 or more years. The vast majority of firefighters retired from the department prior to meeting the criteria for compulsory retirement.(5)

Any changes in retirement patterns as a result of the elimination of the exemption would most likely come from the administrative ranks. It is conceivable that the battalion captains, deputy fire chiefs, and the chief might want to postpone retirement if not required to retire by law. Many administrators and managers continue to work while they are in their 60's. The expiration of the exemption is not likely to provoke recruitment and testing problems, nor an increase in accident rates in most large fire departments. The upper ranks of administrators are small when compared to the rank and file. For the most part, in fire departments with similar characteristics to the one studied, the practical effects of the exemption are likely to be negligible. Many firefighters will continue to retire as early as possible to enhance their prospects of obtaining other employment.(6)

Research has indicated that retirement is influenced by many factors other than age. Health, financial security, wishing to live near children and grandchildren, as well as the lack of job challenges are just a few of the reasons why people choose to retire. But what if some firefighters choose not to retire? Would the public and their co-workers be in danger? Research by the Center for Applied Behavioral Sciences suggests not.

Shepard found that training can reduce some components of biological age by as much as 20 years, and it is unfair to require the retirement of those employees who have chosen a lifestyle that has conserved their physical condition.(7)

Regardless of the ADEA, fire departments should provide fitness and wellness programs and support the maintenance of fitness standards throughout a firefighter's career.

Implementing a fitness program

This section will deal with the practical considerations for implementing a fitness and/or testing program. For technical information on health and fitness standards for firefighters, please refer to the sources cited in the reference section of this article.(8)

According to Schofield, law enforcement agencies have considerable latitude to enforce health and fitness standards that promote good health and job-related fitness in a positive manner. Title VII and Constitutional standards are violated by mandatory standards that disproportionately disadvantaged women and are not validated as job related.(9)

There is no reason to believe that this analysis of law enforcement standards would not be applicable to fire departments and could not be expanded to cover all protected class members including those protected by the ADEA. As long as employers use job related health and fitness standards, they need not fear litigation. What they need to be concerned about is how the fitness standards and programs are developed and implemented. (However, one of the reviewer's of this article made the following comment "My office tests, on a statewide basis, all entrance and promotional levels in municipal fire and police departments. We have recently experienced ADA problems that seem contrary to the logical thought process associated with job-related qualifications. I agree with your statement in theory, although reality has given me a differing picture!"). Fitness standards should not be punitive- but should instead facilitate the health and fitness of firefighters. This point should not be neglected! For example, a fire protection district west of St. Louis County, Missouri attempted to require all incumbent firefighters to pass the Phoenix Test (commonly used physical ability test developed by Phoenix, Arizona to screen fire applicants). Firefighters who failed the test would be punished; repeated failures would be terminated.(10) This proposal provoked the ire of the director of occupational health and safety for the International Association of Firefighters, the St. Louis Area Metro Council of Firefighters, and the Professional Firefighters of St. Louis County Local 2665 which represents the firefighters in this district. Opposition to the test stemmed from concern that the test does not measure training or experience, nor the ability to recognize hazards. The test is based on the time it takes to complete six activities.

The directors of the fire protection board asked the union for a counter proposal. The tentatively agreed upon version has adopted some of the elements of the Phoenix Test and "the firefighters came back with a proposal calling for a physical fitness prescription written by the fitness coordinators for those who failed the test.(11) The policy adopted by the directors still has a provision for disciplinary action for repeated failures of the agility test. However, the negotiator for the union has threatened to take the district to court if a firefighter loses pay or benefits."

To eliminate this discord, Jones prescribes some common sense recommendations for developing health/fitness programs. First, fitness programs should focus on health promotion. It is not enough to evaluate one's fitness level. Efforts should be made to educate the participants and assist them in developing healthier lifestyles. Exercise counseling and information about lifestyle choices should be included. Second, medical screening should be provided. The screening program will identify health risks and also reduce the legal liability of departments in the event that participants encounter health related problems. The screening should determine if it is safe for firefighters to participate in an exercise program and to perform job related duties. Screening guidelines should be based on the participants ages. Jones identifies different criteria for personnel aged 35 or younger, for personnel 36-49, and for personnel 50 and older.(12) My recommendation would be not to have age determine the screening guidelines, but instead use the diagnostic results of the initial screen to develop future screening patterns.

Departments committed to health and fitness should assist officers by making exercise resources available to them. Some departments may have on-site facilities; those that do not might consider negotiating group rate memberships at local fitness clubs. A key issue which demonstrates the department's commitment to a health/fitness program is deciding whether to allow officers to work out while on duty or at their own convenience. Departments that are planning to institute mandatory physical fitness standards should seriously consider allowing on duty workout time before the consequences of the program take effect.(13)

Implement a fitness program and make it mandatory for everyone, but do not penalize officers for poor performance during a reasonable initiation period. Administrators should not fear litigation if the proposed fitness program is communicated in advance of its imposition, if the program is job related and mandatory for everyone, and if a fair amount of time is allowed to lapse which enables the participants, to adjust to the standard. If the fitness test will be used to terminate or suspend the participants, then the standards and test must be validated according to the Uniform Guidelines.

The costs associated with the development and implementation of a testing and fitness program may initially seem prohibitive. These costs however, need to be balanced along side the expenditures that local governments make for disability retirements, workers' compensation claims, as well as the recruitment and training of new firefighters.

Notes

1. Paul O. Davis and Charles O. Dotson, "Job performance testing: an alternative to age discrimination," Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 19 (1987): 179-185; David A. Waldman and Bruce J. Avolio, "A meta-analysis of age differences in job performance," Journal of Applied Psychology 71 (1986): 33-38.

2. Staff, Police Union News III (May, 1992): 5.

3. Staff, Police Union News III (May, 1992): 5.

4. Staff, IPMA Agency News, 17 (December, 1993): 2.

5. Joan E. Pynes, "The ADEA and its exemptions on the mandatory retirement provisions for firefighters," Review of Public Personnel Administration (in press).

6. Robert M. Fogelson, Pensions: The hidden costs of public safety. New York: Columbia University Press, 1984.

7. Roy J. Shepard, (1987). "Human rights and the older worker: Changes in work capacity with age." Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 19 (1987): 168.

8. Michael A. Campion, "Personnel selection for physically demanding jobs: Review and recommendation, Personnel Psychology 36 (1983): 527-550; Center for Applied Behavioral Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University. Alternatives to chronological age in determining standards of suitability for public safety jobs. University Park, PA: Intercollegiate Research Programs, January 1992; Paul O. Davis and Charles O. Dotson, "Job performance testing: an alternative to age discrimination," Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 19 (1987): 179-185; Edwin A. Fleishman, "Evaluating physical abilities required by jobs," Personnel Administrator 24 (1979): 82; Joyce Hogan, "Structure of physical performance in occupational tasks," Journal of Applied Psychology 76 (1991): 495-507; Joyce Hogan and Ann M. Quigley, "Physical standards for employment and the courts," American Psychologist 41 (November 1986): 1193-1217; Kurt Saupe, Mark Sothmann, and David Jasenof, "Aging and the fitness of fire fighters: The complex issues involved in abolishing mandatory retirement ages," American Journal of Public Health 81 (September 1991): 1192-1194; Mark S. Sothman, Kurt W. Saupe, Deborah Jasenof, Joseph Blaney, Susan D. Fuhrman, Thomas Woulfe, P. B. Raven, James P. Pawelczyk, Charles O. Dotson, Frank J. Landy, James J. Smith, and Paul O. Davis, "Advancing age and the cardiorespiratory stress of fire suppression: Determining a minimum standard for aerobic fitness," Human Performance 4 (1990): 217-236.

9. Daniel L. Schofield, "Establishing health and fitness standards, legal considerations," FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, (June 1989): 25.

10. Marianna Riley, "Some firefighters question demanding physical test," St. Louis Post Dispatch, 23 June 1994, p. 4.

11. Marianna Riley, "Physical fitness: A matter of policy," St. Louis Post Dispatch, 11 July 1994, p. 2(W).

12. Glenn R. Jones, "Health and fitness programs," FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin 62 (1992): 8.

13. Glenn R. Jones, "Health and fitness programs," FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin 62 (1992): 13.

Bibliography

Campion, Michael A. "Personnel selection for physically demanding jobs: Review and recommendation." Personnel Psychology 36 (1983): 527-550.

Center for Applied Behavioral Sciences, The Pennsylvania State University. Alternatives to chronological age in determining standards of suitability for public safety jobs. University Park, PA: Intercollegiate Research Programs, January 1992.

Davis, Paul O. & Charles O. Dotson. "Job performance testing: an alternative to age discrimination." Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 19 (1987): 179-185.

Fleishman, Edwin A. "Evaluating physical abilities required by jobs." Personnel Administrator 24 (June 1979): 82-91.

Fogelson, Robert M. Pensions: The hidden costs of public safety. New York: Columbia University Press, 1984.

Hoan, Joyce. "Structure of physical performance in occupational tasks." Journal of Applied Psychology 76 (4) (1991): 495-507.

Hogan, Joyce & Ann M. Quigley. "Physical standards for employment and the courts." American Psychologist 41 (November 1986): 1193-1217.

Hoover, Larry T. "Trends in police physical ability selection testing." Public Personnel Management 21 (Spring 1992): 29-40.

H. R. Rep. No. 756, 99th Congress, 2d Sess., (1986).

Staff (December, 1993). IPMA Agency News, 17, p.2.

Jones, Glenn R. (1992). "Health and fitness programs." FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin 62 (1992): 6-11.

Pynes, Joan E. (in press). The ADEA and its exemptions on the mandatory retirement provisions for firefighters. Review of Public Personnel Administration.

Riley, Marianna. "Some firefighters question demanding physical test." St. Louis Post Dispatch, 23 June 1994, 4.

Riley, Marianna. "Physical fitness: A matter of policy." St. Louis Post Dispatch, 11 July 1994, 2(W). Staff (May, 1992). Police Union News III (May, 1992): 5.

Saupe, Kurt, Mark Sothmann, and Deborah Jasenof. "Aging and the fitness of fire fighters: The complex issues involved in abolishing mandatory retirement ages." American Journal of Public Health 81 (September 1991): 1192-1194.

Schofield, Daniel L. "Establishing health and fitness standards, legal considerations." FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, (June 1989): 25-31.

Shepard, Roy J. (1987). "Human rights and the older worker: Changes in work capacity with age." Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise 19 (1987): 168-173.

Sothman, Mark S., Kurt Saupe, Deborah Jasenof, Joseph J. Blaney, Susan D. Fuhrman, Thomas Woulfe, P.B. Raven, James P. Pawelczyk, Charles O. Dotson, Frank J. Landy, and Paul O. Davis. "Advancing age and the cardiorespiratory stress of fire suppression: Determining a minimum standard for aerobic fitness." Human Performance 4 (1990): 217-236.

Staff. "Last bastion of mandatory retirement should fall." Training (March 1993): 57.

Waldman, David A. and Bruce J. Avolio. "A meta-analysis of age differences in job performance." Journal of Applied Psychology 71 (1986): 33-38.

Joan E. Pynes is an Associate Professor at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville. Her specialization is in Public Personnel Administration.