Employment Selection and Training Development
Employment Selection and Training and Development Programs
One would think that the employee selection process would be simple, but it is not. Two cases will demonstrate what is not, and what the correct way to approach a hiring situation is. There are specific ways to handle each situation that will minimize the risk to the company during the selection process. These alternative solutions will prevent the companies from ending up in court for discrimination in the hiring process.
Speedy Delivery Service (SDC)
The first case example chosen to demonstrate improper employment selection practices is Speedy Delivery Service. SDC would prefer not to hire women to perform deliveries for them. To discourage women from applying, SDC has decided to show extremely large, bulky, heavy packages to the women that are interested in the job. The prospective female applicants are lead to believe the job requires them to carry these object up multiple flights of steps without assistance, therefore discouraging them from applying for the job. Male applicants are not shown this same demonstration, therefore encouraging the male applicants (Moran, 2008. Ch. 2).
The strategy that SDC is using in this case will increase the risks for the company to be charged with discriminatory hiring practices. This is a prime example of gender discrimination. Employers cannot overstate the physical requirements for a job. The misrepresentation of physical requirements goes against Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
It is fine for employers to test for prospective employees abilities to perform required activities, as long as the tests are the same for each individual. Whether the prospective employee is male, or female the test have to be identical. Once SDC has chosen potential new hires, they can have prospective employees demonstrate that they have the capability to meet the physical requirements to perform the deliveries. If a female prospect has the same potential as a male
One would think that the employee selection process would be simple, but it is not. Two cases will demonstrate what is not, and what the correct way to approach a hiring situation is. There are specific ways to handle each situation that will minimize the risk to the company during the selection process. These alternative solutions will prevent the companies from ending up in court for discrimination in the hiring process.
Speedy Delivery Service (SDC)
The first case example chosen to demonstrate improper employment selection practices is Speedy Delivery Service. SDC would prefer not to hire women to perform deliveries for them. To discourage women from applying, SDC has decided to show extremely large, bulky, heavy packages to the women that are interested in the job. The prospective female applicants are lead to believe the job requires them to carry these object up multiple flights of steps without assistance, therefore discouraging them from applying for the job. Male applicants are not shown this same demonstration, therefore encouraging the male applicants (Moran, 2008. Ch. 2).
The strategy that SDC is using in this case will increase the risks for the company to be charged with discriminatory hiring practices. This is a prime example of gender discrimination. Employers cannot overstate the physical requirements for a job. The misrepresentation of physical requirements goes against Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.
It is fine for employers to test for prospective employees abilities to perform required activities, as long as the tests are the same for each individual. Whether the prospective employee is male, or female the test have to be identical. Once SDC has chosen potential new hires, they can have prospective employees demonstrate that they have the capability to meet the physical requirements to perform the deliveries. If a female prospect has the same potential as a male
References: Moran, J. (2008). Employment Law (4th ed.). Retrieved from The University of Phoenix eBook Collection.