Opinion ID: 521944
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: validation of employment exams

Text: 15 In Title VII cases involving the use of written examinations for hiring or promotion, a prima facie case is presented by a statistical demonstration that the test in question has an adverse racial impact. Upon a showing of such impact, the burden shifts to the employer to prove that the test is job related. Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 425, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 2375, 45 L.Ed.2d 280, 301 (1975); Fisher v. Procter & Gamble Manufacturing Co., 613 F.2d 527, 544 (5th Cir.1980), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1115, 101 S.Ct. 929, 66 L.Ed.2d 845 (1981); Scott v. City of Anniston, 597 F.2d 897, 901 (5th Cir.1979), cert. denied, 446 U.S. 917, 100 S.Ct. 1850, 64 L.Ed.2d 271 (1980). If the employer establishes the job relatedness of the test, the burden then shifts back to the challenging party to demonstrate that alternative methods of selection would have a lesser adverse impact. Dothard v. Rawlinson, 433 U.S. 321, 329, 97 S.Ct. 2720, 2725, 53 L.Ed.2d 786, 797 (1977); Albemarle Paper Co., 422 U.S. at 425, 95 S.Ct. at 2375. 16 The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has issued Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures to assist in determining whether employment tests are job related. 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1607. The Guidelines are designed to assist employers, labor organizations, employment agencies, and licensing and certification boards to comply with requirements of Federal law prohibiting employment practices which discriminate on grounds of race, color, religion, sex, and national origin. They are designed to provide a framework for determining the proper use of tests and other selection procedures. 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1607.1(B). The Supreme Court has held that the Guidelines are entitled to great deference. Griggs v. Duke Power Company, 401 U.S. 424, 433-34, 91 S.Ct. 849, 854-55, 28 L.Ed.2d 158, 165-66 (1971). See also Watkins v. Scott Paper Co., 530 F.2d 1159, 1186-87 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 861, 97 S.Ct. 163, 50 L.Ed.2d 139 (1976). 17 The Guidelines refer to three procedures or validity studies, whereby sufficient job-relatedness may be demonstrated: criterion-related validity, construct validity, and content validity. 29 C.F.R. Sec. 1607.5. The Supreme Court has described these methods of validation: 18 Professional standards developed by the American Psychological Association in its Standards for Educational and Psychological Tests and Manuals (1966), accept three basic methods of validation: empirical or criterion validity (demonstrated by identifying criteria that indicate successful job performance and then correlating test scores and the criteria so identified); construct validity (demonstrated by examinations structured to measure the degree to which job applicants have identifiable characteristics that have been determined to be important in successful job performance); and content validity (demonstrated by tests whose content closely approximates tasks to be performed on the job by the applicant). These standards have been relied upon by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in fashioning its Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures, 29 CFR pt. 1607 (1975), and have been judicially noted in cases where validation of employment tests has been in issue. See e.g., Albemarle Paper Co. v. Moody, 422 U.S. 405, 431, 95 S.Ct. 2362, 2378, 45 L.Ed.2d 280, 304 (1975); Douglas v. Hampton, 168 U.S.App.D.C., at 70, 512 F.2d, at 984 [ (D.C.Cir.1975) ]; Vulcan Society v. Civil Service Comm'n, 490 F.2d 387, 394 (CA2 1973). 19 Washington v. Davis, 426 U.S. 229, 247 n. 13, 96 S.Ct. 2040, 2051, 48 L.Ed.2d 597, 612 (1976). 20 In this case, the City of Atlanta chose to attempt validation of its exam through the criterion-related method. As the issues in this case hinge upon a clear understanding of this technique, a closer analysis is necessary. 21 At the heart of criterion-related validity is the statistical correlation between performance on the test and objective measures or criterions of performance on the job. This is measured in one of two ways. In a predictive study, all applicants for a position are given the examination. Those applicants selected for the position are allowed to work at the job for a period of time and their job performance is then measured. Their preemployment test scores are then compared to their job performance ratings. In a second method, known as concurrent validation, the test is administered to existing employees and their scores are compared to their job performance. It is this method that was used by McCann Associates in the preparation of the allegedly unlawful examination. 22 To prove that a test is criterion-related, a proponent of an exam must show two elements of correlation. These elements are practical significance and statistical significance. Practical significance is the degree to which test scores relate to job performance and is measured by a correlation coefficient. Statistical significance is a measure of the confidence that can be placed on the practical significance; that is, it expresses the probability that a particular correlation coefficient occurred by chance. In Ensley Branch of NAACP v. Seibels, 616 F.2d 812 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 449 U.S. 1061, 101 S.Ct. 783, 66 L.Ed.2d 603 (1980), the former Fifth Circuit felt compelled to state that explanation of a few statistical concepts is in order. That explanation bears repeating here: 23 Statistically, the degree of correlation between two variables (e.g., entrance exam scores and subsequent school grades) is expressed as a correlation coefficient on a scale running from + 1.0 to - 1.0. A perfect positive correlation (e.g., entrance exam scores exactly predict subsequent school grades, with the higher exam scores predicting the best grades) would be expressed as + 1.0, and a perfect negative correlation (e.g., entrance exam scores exactly predict subsequent school grades, except in reverse, with the lower exam scores predicting the best grades) would be expressed as - 1.0. Where the two variables had absolutely no relationship to each other, the correlation coefficient would be .0. The closer a correlation coefficient is to either + 1.0 or - 1.0, the higher the magnitude of the correlation; and the closer it is to .0, the lower the magnitude. Mueller, Schuessler & Castner, Statistical Reasoning in Sociology, 2d Ed., at p. 315. 24 Because a purely random drawing of a sample is liable to produce a correlation coefficient which is somewhat off an absolute .0, the concept of statistical significance becomes relevant. The concept is tied to the statistical theory of probability and is dependent upon the number of people in the sample. Generally, if a correlation coefficient is so low that, on the basis of the sample size involved, more than 1 in 20 random drawings could be expected to produce a correlation at least as great, that correlation coefficient is considered not to be statistically significant, or simply to be the same as a correlation coefficient of .0. On the other hand, if the obtained coefficient could be expected to reoccur no more than once in 20 random drawings, it is considered statistically significant, the statistical indication for which is p 25 Ensley Branch of NAACP, 616 F.2d at 817 n. 13.