View Single Post
Old 06-03-2009, 09:35 AM   #4 (permalink)
nate99
Senior Member
 
nate99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 323
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bytsi View Post
Well... I agree that if fitness is part of your job (chasing suspects, etc) then it's important to be at a reasonable weight/fitness level. But using BMI instead of bf% seems ridiculous to me... I do think there should be a LITTLE more leeway than the numbers cited in that article...
Given that they've only actually suspended a very few, I would imagine if any had a BMI over the limit because of muscle mass that there would be no action taken. If the rules are indeed that poorly worded then they need to change, but that didn't seem to be the point of contention.

The officer seemed to be complaining that they would be cut off after failing, and that the sedentary nature of their job was a contributor to failing the test. On the first point, they get two years (at least) to get in shape, and on the second, that's just a miserable excuse.

If you can pass some sort of enduance/strength/agility test that would correspond to your ability to perform your job (similar to a military PT test) whilst eating a bacon double cheesburger, I say more power to you, but that dimension of fitness, the actual ability to perform, was not mentioned by the complaining parties.
nate99 is offline   Reply With Quote