Discrimination in the recruitment process is the employer’s refusal to hire a specialist because it is subjectively negative for the employer. It may interfere with labor duties performance but does not apply to the applicant’s business qualities. The concern of discriminatory employment tests and selection procedures is reviewed in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA). Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids disparate treatment and disparate impact discrimination. For instance, disparate treatment can appear in the situation when the company examines only non-Caucasian applicants’ reading skills.
Concerning disparate impact discrimination, the document also prohibits employers from using neutral tests or selection procedures that might affect disproportionately exclude persons as these assessments can be not job-related. Xron Corporation, being a publicly-traded organization, hires 5,000 employees in manufacturing fields. During recruitment, it applies written tests for determining employees’ appropriateness for work. According to the U. S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, written assessments measure some information, being unusual predictors of the work process.
However, ” using these tools can violate the federal anti-discrimination laws if an employer intentionally uses them to discriminate based on race, color, sex, national origin, religion, disability, or age. Consequently, these tests had negative consequences for Asians, Hispanics, and African-Americans. These groups of candidates may obtain worse test results than Caucasian applicants; therefore, companies avoid hiring non-Caucasians. Moreover, using writing assessments, sometimes, there are several controversial questions about personal life without the right answer, which creates biases before seeing an individual.
Errors in the interpretation of the results are possible; it is necessary to involve professionals to assess personality tests’ impact. Test results cannot be the main factor in deciding whether a candidate is suitable for a given vacancy. The first remedy the company might take to insulate itself is that testing should be an additional element in verifying a candidate in the selection for a specific position. The results’ reliability is increased if the candidate passes multiple tests. Personnel testing methods are selected in each particular case individually – depending on the company’s needs and job characteristics.
The second remedy is that written tests should be interpreted with the company’s in-house psychologist’s help. In this case, the test results reliability is 50-70%, depending on the psychologist’s professional level. According to Phillips and Gully, as long as the company supports all the rules for interpreting and conducting tests, the advantages include assessment objectivity and a similar approach to the criteria for evaluating and interpreting the results. Besides, the head of the company must also assess the test results as evaluation becomes not only a source of information about the level of qualifications of employees but also a method of studying the individual traits and further potential of workers.