Kansas Administrative Regulations › Agency 21 - KANSAS HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION › Article 30 - GUIDELINES ON EMPLOYEE SELECTION PROCEDURES AND RECRUITMENT › Section 21-30-4 - Evidence of validity

Current through Register Vol. 43, No. 28, July 11, 2024
(a) Each
			 person using tests to select from among candidates for a position or for
			 membership shall have available for inspection evidence that the tests are
			 being used in a manner which does not violate 21-30-3. Such evidence shall be
			 examined for indications of possible discrimination, such as instances of
			 higher rejection rates for minority candidates than nonminority candidates.
			 Furthermore, where technically feasible, a test should be validated for each
			 minority group with which it is used; that is, any differential rejection rates
			 that may exist, based on a test, must be relevant to performance on the jobs in
			 question.
(b) The term
			 "technically feasible" as used in these guidelines means having or obtaining a
			 sufficient number of minority individuals to achieve findings of statistical
			 and practical significance, the opportunity to obtain unbiased job performance
			 criteria, etc. It is the responsibility of the person claiming absence of
			 technical feasibility to positively demonstrate evidence of this absence.
(c) Evidence of a test's validity
			 should consist of empirical data demonstrating that the test is predictive of
			 or significantly correlated with important elements of work behavior which
			 comprise or are relevant to the job or jobs for which candidates are being
			 evaluated.
(1) If job progression structures
			 and seniority provisions are so established that new employees will probably,
			 within a reasonable period of time and in a great majority of cases, progress
			 to a higher level, it may be considered that candidates are being evaluated for
			 jobs at that higher level. However, where job progression is not so nearly
			 automatic, or the time span is such that higher level jobs or employees'
			 potential may be expected to change in significant ways, it shall be considered
			 that candidates are being evaluated for a job at or near the entry level. This
			 point is made to underscore the principle that attainment of or performance at
			 a higher level job is a relevant criterion in validating employment tests only
			 when there is a high probability that persons employed will in fact attain that
			 higher level job within a reasonable period of time.
(2) Where a test is to be used in different
			 units of a multiunit organization and no significant differences exist between
			 units, jobs, and applicant populations, evidence obtained in one unit may
			 suffice for the others. Similarly, where the validation process requires the
			 collection of data throughout a multiunit organization, evidence of validity
			 specific to each unit may not be required. There may also be instances where
			 evidence of validity is appropriately obtained from more than one company in
			 the same industry. Both in this instance and in the use of data collected
			 throughout a multiunit organization, evidence of validity specific to each unit
			 may not be required: Provided, That no significant differences exist between
			 units, jobs and applicant populations.