Opinion ID: 354271
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The Job-Relatedness Of The 1969 Engineer's Exam And The 1970 Lieutenant's Exam

Text: 56 No argument has been made by defendants-appellees that the 1969 engineer's exam and the 1970 lieutenant's exam are content valid. Instead, appellees have attempted to demonstrate that these examinations are criterion valid. A criterion validity study is one in which test scores are shown to be correlated with identifiable criteria which indicate successful job performance. Washington v. Davis, supra at 247, n. 13, 96 S.Ct. 2040. Appellees relied upon two criterion related validity studies. First, appellees correlated the test results with pre-existing efficiency ratings of candidate's performance in the positions they held before they took the promotional exam. 8 Second, a correlation was made between the candidate's efficiency rating and ratings given in drill tests. 57 The district court recognized that the two criterion validity studies are not in accord with the E.E.O.C. Guidelines which require a correlation between test scores and important elements of work behavior which comprise or are relevant to the job or jobs for which candidates are being evaluated.29 C.F.R. § 1607.4(c) (emphasis added). See also, Albemarle, supra 422 U.S. at 431, 95 S.Ct. 2362. In this case, the efficiency ratings measured performance in a lower level job rather than the job for which the test was being administered. For a criterion validity study of this type to be consistent with the E.E.O.C. Guidelines, it would have been necessary to correlate test scores with post-promotion efficiency ratings rather than performance ratings in lower level jobs. As we stated in our order granting in part appellant's motion for an injunction pending appeal, the only way a correlation between pre-promotion efficiency ratings and test scores could comply with the E.E.O.C. Guidelines would be if the employer could establish that requirements of the lower level job and the job for which the test is being administered are identical. However, no such showing has been made in this case. 58 Similarly, the correlation between drill test scores and the efficiency ratings as a basis for showing criterion validity do not comply with the E.E.O.C. Guidelines. Since there was no job analysis nor any findings by the district court to establish that drill test scores measure relevant aspects of job performance in the job tested for, 9 data based on drill tests fails to predict performance in promotional ranks. 10 59 Despite this non-compliance with the E.E.O.C. Guidelines, the district court concluded that the criterion related studies were adequate to satisfy the defendants' burden apparently because (t)he tests themselves . . . appear on their face to be job-related. The APA Standards, however, specifically reject face validity as a method for validation of tests. APA Standards, p. 29. Moreover, the district court did not give adequate weight to the fact that the criterion validity studies failed to comply with the E.E.O.C. Guidelines. The Supreme Court has stated that the Guidelines are entitled to considerable deference as the administrative interpretation of Title VII by the agency whose task it is to enforce it. Albemarle, supra at 430-31, 95 S.Ct. 2362; Griggs, supra, 401 U.S. at 433-34, 91 S.Ct. 849. This court has stated that (c) ompliance with these Guidelines is generally required absent some showing that a cogent reason exists for non-compliance. United States v. City of Chicago, supra at 430. In our order granting in part appellant's injunction pending appeal, we emphasized that while compliance with the E.E.O.C. Guidelines was not the only possible validation method, the City's burden is much heavier if it has not used such a method. 60 On remand, therefore, the district court should make a detailed step-by-step analysis to determine whether the appellees have met their heavy burden of establishing job-relatedness in the absence of compliance with the E.E.O.C. Guidelines. Appellees should be required to make a strong showing that the two criterion validity studies are predictive of successful performance in the jobs being tested for.