3 ms·
AFAIK Hasn’t been legal unless the test is closely related to the job since Griggs v. Duke Power Company, a 1971 SCOTUS case.
by nickff 2y ago
AFAIK Hasn’t been legal unless the test is closely related to the job since Griggs v. Duke Power Company, a 1971 SCOTUS case.
- tptacek 2y agoYou can just go look this up with IQ test vendors; you don't have to derive it axiomatically. They proudly list their (large) clients.
- disgruntledphd2 2y agoYou need to ensure that the test doesn't discriminate on the basis of a protected characteristic though.
- tptacek 2y agoThese are just completely bog-standard cognitive aptitude tests; in fact, they are if anything less rigorous than a modern IQ test. They're generally not specialized to specific jobs. You can read Reddit threads about people taking (and studying for) them. Don't get me wrong: I think this is an incredibly dumb practice. But there's a mythology that IQ testing is a super-effective tool for recruiting that has been suppressed by anti-discrimination law. That is not the case. Most companies don't use IQ tests, because they're not fit for purpose.
- disgruntledphd2 2y agoIt really really depends. If you're gonna train junior people then IQ tests are great, otherwise work sample tests are better. It definitely is true that IQ tests are used less in the US because of prior case law though.