3 ms·
Justifiable business reason is still a strong bar. For example, with no evidence in either direction for a claim there is no justifiable business reason even if
by TimPC 4y ago
Justifiable business reason is still a strong bar. For example, with no evidence in either direction for a claim there is no justifiable business reason even if the claim is somewhat intuitive. So if you want to require high-school diplomas because you think people who have them will do the job better you better track that data for years and be prepared to demonstrate it if sued. If you want to use IQ tests because you anticipate smarter people will do the job better you better have IQ tests done on your previous employee population demonstrating the correlation before imposing the requirement.
- cmeacham98 4y agoEDIT: my parent edited and replaced their entire comment, it originally said "you can't use IQ tests even if you prove they lead to better job performance". I leave my original comment below for posterity: This is not true, IQ tests in the mentioned Griggs v. Duke Power Co. (and similar cases) were rejected as disparate impact specifically because the company provided no evidence they lead to better performance. To quote the majority opinion of Griggs: > On the record before us, neither the high school completion requirement nor the general intelligence test is shown to bear a demonstrable relationship to successful performance of the jobs for which it was used. Both were adopted, as the Court of Appeals noted, without meaningful study of their relationship to job performance ability.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- tgsovlerkhgsel 4y agoWouldn't that be trivial if you have your training data set?