I have an engineering degree and a heck of a resume including various security clearances and management positions. My headhunter put me in for a very high position at nearby company. They did a screening interview, then sent me for a 4 hour evaluation test by a psychiatrist. After the math, English and reading skills test I had to answer several hundred psychological questions. “I think it’s okay to steal from my employer if my pay is too low.” “I think it’s okay to give illegal drugs to a coworker providing no money changes hands.” “I think marihuana should be legal.” “It’s okay to do illegal drugs on the weekends if I’m not doing them at work.” “I think violence is okay provided the person I hit deserved it.” These questions were asked about 30 different ways. According to my headhunter, this company has cut its turnover by 50% since they began this testing. Apparently, a large percentage of people are idiots. I’m thinking if this test is that good, maybe background checks aren’t necessary. Provided you give all the employees the same test, it should be legal to screen this way. By-the-way, the math, English and reading skills went from grade school to college level. Requiring a twelfth-grade passing score might screen out most criminals.
>>Provided you give all the employees the same test, it should be legal to screen this way.
Actually, I don’t believe that is so. I think you can get in EEOC trouble if a test you use has disparate racial impact.
My dad had such tests administered to potential employees seeking to work at a nuclear plant he managed.
He actually blocked the employment of two individuals who came highly recommended, all because both men tested were highly functioning psycopaths.
The testing seems a good idea, until some lawyers decide to take the employer to court because the test will have a disparate impact on some disadvantaged group. It adversely effects the stupid, or people that didn’t study or some minority, etc.