Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
An example of typical questions might ask if you are more sensible or adventurous. [2] Examples of personality-oriented integrity test are the Personnel reaction blank, employment inventory from personnel decisions Inc., and the Hogan personality inventory. The personnel reaction blank is based on California psychological inventory.
Workplaces in the United States must display this poster explaining the Employment Polygraph Protection Act to employees. The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 (EPPA) is a United States federal law that generally prevents employers from using polygraph (lie detector) tests, either for pre-employment screening or during the course of employment, with certain exemptions.
An unfair labor practice (ULP) in United States labor law refers to certain actions taken by employers or unions that violate the National Labor Relations Act of 1935 (49 Stat. 449) 29 U.S.C. § 151–169 (also known as the NLRA and the Wagner Act after NY Senator Robert F. Wagner [1]) and other legislation.
A pre-hire assessment (or pre-employment assessment) is a test or questionnaire that candidates complete as part of the job application process. The use of a valid and expert assessment is an effective way to determine which applicants are the most qualified for a specific job based on their strengths and preferences.
The questions may be multiple choice, yes/no, rank-order or open-ended. The questions are used to gauge job applicants’ knowledge, skills, attitudes and/or personality before conducting a phone screening or in-person interview. [2] Large employers like Walmart, McDonald's and Burger King use pre-employment tests. [3]
Employment practices that do not directly discriminate against a protected category may still be illegal if they produce a disparate impact on members of a protected group. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits employment practices that have a discriminatory impact, unless they are related to job performance.
For example, if an hypothetical fire department used a 100-pound test, that policy might disproportionately exclude female job applicants from employment. Under the 80% rule mentioned above, unsuccessful female job applicants would have a prima facie case of disparate impact "discrimination" against the department if they passed the 100-pound ...
Griggs v. Duke Power Co., 401 U.S. 424 (1971), was a court case argued before the Supreme Court of the United States on December 14, 1970. It concerned employment discrimination and the disparate impact theory, and was decided on March 8, 1971. [1]