EEOC’s Case Against Walmart
The purpose of this advisory is to conduct an AEI Review of the EEOC’s case against Walmart. We will examine the issues raised by the EEOC and how these concerns are addressed within the AEI program. AEI Review EEOC Walmart
The Physical Abilities Testing conducted by Walmart. Which led to the 2010 issue with female applicants, is not detailed in the recent complaint or consent decree. Walmart’s filings from that period provide insights into the components of the physical abilities test:
– The Carton Lift Test: Assesses the capability of an individual to handle cases weighing between 19 to 55 lbs, simulating work in a distribution center. It requires lifting and carrying a carton 15 feet and placing it on different platform levels within a certain time.
– The Sit-Up Test measures the number of sit-ups an individual can complete in one minute.
– The Arm Endurance Test involves rotating a handle, similar to bicycle pedals, and recording the number of rotations in two minutes.
The results of these tests were processed by computer to determine an applicant’s suitability for the order filler role, as indicated in Walmart’s 2010 filings.
The EEOC’s complaint against Walmart alleges that:
– The Physical Abilities Test (PAT) disproportionately affects female grocery order filler applicants.
– The PAT lacks job-relatedness and is not in alignment with the business necessity for the position in question.
EEOC mandates that employment screening processes be valid. According to methodologies laid out in the Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures. A disparate impact on any protected class requires validation documents showing job-specificity and fairness to prevent unjust adverse effects.
AEI’s physical abilities testing program draws from three prospective validation studies across different industries, adhering to the EEOC’s stringent validation standards. This involves detailed validation documentation that includes job analysis, statistical analysis, quantification of physical job demands, and confirmation of these demands through worker surveys.
AEI’s test battery consists solely of elements that mirror job-specific, essential tasks, with clear objective pass or fail outcomes. Avoiding ambiguous terms like “competitive” or “non-competitive.”
AEI has defended the validity and legal integrity of its testing program in over 110 instances, with a million tests conducted, upholding the standards of the EEOC Uniform Guidelines and the Americans with Disabilities Act since 1989.
The Advanced Ergonomics physical abilities testing program is in three separate criterion-relatable prospective validation studies across different industries. These studies, recognized by the EEOC as the most robust form of validation, underline the efficacy of AEI’s approach to developing and validating physical abilities tests for client employers.
AEI’s protocol strictly follows the EEOC Uniform Guidelines, requiring meticulous preparation of comprehensive validation documentation. This documentation includes job analysis methodology, statistical data assessment, and quantification of vital job physical demands. Supported by surveys conducted with current employees, alongside a detailed explanation of how the tests align with specific job requirements.
Since setting pass/fail criteria and predictions regarding the effectiveness of the screening in injury reduction are also clarified. Designed to meet EEOC Uniform Guidelines, tailored to each AEI client employer’s needs, ensuring the utmost validity and legal defensibility.
The AEI test battery comprises elements that reflect the essential physical demands of specific jobs. Because the element scoring with an objective “pass” or “fail,” eliminating ambiguity and yet the need for subjective labels such as “competitive” or “non-competitive.”
We share this information to alleviate concerns arising from the case against Walmart. Reiterating our commitment to adhering to legal standards of the EEOC Uniform Guidelines and the Americans with Disabilities Act. Our testing program’s validity and integrity have successfully upheld through every review and challenge, spanning 110 instances and over one million tests performed for our clients. AEI Review EEOC Walmart