Testing and measurement is an organized advance of collecting information concerning individuals with the aim of recruiting the best and it could be employed to create employment or profession-related judgments regarding applicants. Evaluation is carried out for some particular purpose. Gilliland–Moore wines must ensure that it recruits the most efficient workforce that has the necessary qualities for the company to attain its objectives.
We will write a custom Proposal on Gilliland-Moore Wines. Legal Advice specifically for you
301 certified writers online
Additionally, testing and measurement during pre-employment must be conducted in line with the set legal and ethical laws. The laws as well as regulations directing the employment progression have increased in the last decades (Wallace & Page, 2006, pp. 467-478).
The majority of these regulations as well as laws have significant implications for carrying out employment evaluation. This phase on legal advice seeks to explain the various legal and ethical rules that Gilliland-Moore wines must observe to ensure that the recruitment practice is in tandem with professional, legal, and ethical values.
Legal and ethical issues
The universal cause of employment regulations and rules is to forbid unwarranted bias in employment and offer equal employment chances for everyone. Unjust discrimination happens when employment judgments are founded on race, tribe, religion, sex, years of age, and disability instead of job-appropriate understanding, skills, competence, and other attributes.
Recruitment practices that unduly cut off certain individuals can be referred as illegal or biased recruitment practices (Wallace & Page, 2006, pp. 479-483). Some of the legal and ethical issues that Gilliland-Moore wines must observe include the following:
- Age Discrimination- the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) of 1967 forbids biasness against applicants of 40 years of old or more in every facet of the recruitment process (Butler & Berret, 2011, pp. 1-11). People in this group should be given equal employment chance and unfairness in testing and assessment is forbidden.
- The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) – The EEOC is accountable for implementing federal laws barring employment unfairness. It obtains, scrutinizes, and processes accusations of prohibited employment progressions of employers registered by a person or a group of people.
The EEOC took part in building the ‘Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures’ that present an outline for employers for establishing the appropriate application of the selection process (Kaplan, & Saccuzzo, 2008, pp. 45-47).
- Disabilities – with respect to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), eligible people with disabilities should be offered equal employment chances in every aspect. The ADA forbids employers with sizable workers from singling out qualified people with disabilities. An eligible person with a disability who is capable of performing the necessary tasks of a job must be considered for employment without discrimination.
In this regard, disability is described largely to entail physical and psychological impairment that significantly restricts actions of a person, for example, seeing walking, speaking, or hearing. Ordinary examples comprise of visual and hearing disabilities, cancer, drug addiction, HIV and AIDS, and epilepsy.
- The Standard of education and psychological assessment- even though these elements have been built like professional principles, they depend on appropriate regulations to avoid discrimination. Additionally, they are regularly cited in court cases concerning testing performances.
Psychological assessment is often used to spot applicants who may conceal perceived unconstructive or offensive characteristics of the past; for instance, a criminal activity or drug addiction in a bid to recognize inappropriate candidates and spare the employer from difficulties that may otherwise come up at some point in the course of employment (Kaplan, & Saccuzzo, 2008, pp. 48-67).
- Civil Rights Act (CRA) – according to this act, there is prohibition of unjust biasness in every term and condition of service founded on race, religion, country, sex, and color.
Unjust biasness founded on race, religion, country, sex and color
The issues of disability and age have as well been included in unjust biasness. Men as well as women, individuals of 40 years and above, the disabled individuals, and individuals of a given race, tribe, and religion are defended under the Civil Rights Act and additional laws on employment (Woods, 2006, pp. 65-68). People in these groups are called elements in a protected group.
The Civil Rights Act covers such things as the following:
- Disciplinary measure
- Fringe benefits
- Job categorization
- Performance assessment
- Union or other association
The Tower Amendment of the Civil Rights Act advocates for the usage of competently built workplace assessments comprising the application of psychometrics in recruitment conditions to create employment resolutions (Woods, 2006, pp. 69-73). Nevertheless, only tools that do not single out any protected group are appropriate. In this regard, it is advisable for Gilliland-Moore wines to use only tests formulated by professionals who have shown abilities in this sector.
Unjust discrimination happens when recruitment decisions are subject to race, disability, gender, religious group, ethnic group, or age instead of job-related knowledge, skillfulness, abilities, and additional attributes. Gilliland-Moore wines must thus employ tests that are impartial and just for every group.
In a bid to make sure that the assessment does not discriminate disabled individuals, Gilliland-Moore wines must certify that the assessment measures skillfulness, but not disability. Assessments that reflect abilities not related to the profession should as well be avoided.
Additionally, Gilliland-Moore wines must take caution with ability, psychological, and individuality assessments. The ordinary multiple-choice design of aptitude assessments might show favoritism because it reveals test-taking expertise instead of revealing the job abilities (Wallace & Page, 2006, pp. 484-488).
Moreover, personality assessments have the likelihood of encroaching upon privacy by questioning into personal subjects such as religious convictions. If Gilliland-Moore wines Winery chooses to apply such an assessment, it should be applicable, relevant, and circumspectly evaluated.
Butler, H., & Berret, B. (2011). A generation lost: The reality of age discrimination in today’s hiring practices. Journal of Management & Marketing Research, 9(1), 1-11.
Kaplan, M., & Saccuzzo, P. (2008). Psychological testing: Principles, applications, and issues. Ohio, MA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Get your first paper with 15% OFF
Wallace, J., & Page, E. (2006). Applicant Reactions to Pre-Employment Application Blanks: A Legal and Procedural Justice Perspective. Journal of Business & Psychology, 20(4), 467-488.
Woods, B. (2006). LBJ: Architect of American Ambition. New York, NY: Free Press.