Employee Testing Resources

Row corner-top-left Shape Decorative svg added to top
Row corner-top-right Shape Decorative svg added to bottom
What is employee testing? Essentially, employee testing is a means through which employers safely and legally match an employee's physical capabilities with the essential functions of the job – abiding by all legal parameters. In the same way that driving through a school zone is legal – there are considerations within testing to ensure you avoid the equivalent of driving 50 mph through that school zone.   The information below will assist you in ensuring you have the proper information to be able to bring this extraordinary level of protection to your employees.

Methodologies & Types.

It is important to understand that there are different methodologies and different formats for testing.

Starting with the methodologies in the diagram below, you can simulate the actual task specifics of a job to confirm whether a candidate is capable or incapable of performing the job.  This is the most direct method of testing – it actually tests if the applicant can perform the job. Functional testing/physical ability testing is an example of a direct method of testing.

Other less direct methods essentially extrapolate from measurements (isokinetic, electrodiagnostic, etc.) to predict if the candidate can capably perform a task.  With these methods, a significant amount of computation is required to ensure the extrapolation is truly reflective of performing the job.

While it is true that there are valid tests on the market for both types of methodologies (direct and indirect), the act of having someone perform the job task in a clinic eliminates the burden – and with it the risk – that arises with an indirect method that requires a conversion of a nonfunctional measurement into an accurate prediction of someone’s ability to do the job.

Comment 306

Testing Methodologies.

Pros
  • Quick to perform
  • Can be performed by PTs/OTs, athletic trainers, techs, etc.
  • Works well for public safety-sensitive positions such as law enforcement, emergency medical, firefighters
  • Includes job-specific tasks to ascertain the applicant’s ability to do the job.
  • Job-specific
  • Includes different types of testing formats for post-offer comprehensive tests, agility tests, and Fit For Duty testing.
  • Provides baseline info for the body parts recorded in the event of injury using surface EMG.
  • Can be performed by a trained tech
Cons
  • Requires expensive isokinetic equipment making it difficult and costly to scale
  • Does not allow for job-specific movements such as lifting/carrying, reaching at various levels, stair climbing, and ladder climbing.
  • Requires criterion-related validity, which only occurs by collecting data from a large population of the work force to establish “cut scores”. This requires substantial human resources and costs to complete, and most employers/job analysts skip this step – resulting in cut scores that are not job-specific thus leading to disparate impact as noted in several recent cases.
  • Studies have shown isokinetic trunk testing was of no value in employee selection – isokinetic measures of trunk muscles were not found to predict future cases of occupational low back pain (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8138847/)
  • The test tasks correlate to the job tasks, but do not simulate the job tasks
  • Requires criterion-related validity, which only occurs by collecting data from a large population of the work force to establish “cut scores”. This requires substantial human resources and costs to complete, and most employers/job analysts skip this step – resulting in cut scores that are not job-specific thus leading to disparate impact as noted in several recent cases.
  • Not job-specific
  • Expensive (over $2000 for test results was noted)
  • Requires a second test to be performed (post-injury claim) to compare to baseline test to determine age/extent of injury (at least one case ruled the EFA to be invalid)
  • Relies on 1st and 2nd test having the exact same electrode setup/placement to record comparative results
Court Cases

These tests were not job-specific and were deemed to be discriminatory by the EEOC.   

  • Only court cases lost were due to a lack of scientific rigor of physical demands/job analysis and/or test was not actually job-specific.
    • With proper physical demands analysis, legal compliance is assured.
    • Not all physical demands analysis are created equal

In this case, the court ruled the orthopedic surgeon was correct in asserting the EFA was not valid and didn’t correspond/correlate to his physical exam and medical history findings. The employer lost the case and had to compensate the injured employee.

1 - Baseline Testing once hired or already employed

Isokinetic Testing 

Pros:

  • Quick to perform
  • Can be performed by PTs/OTs, athletic trainers, techs, etc.

Cons:

  • Requires expensive isokinetic equipment making it difficult and costly to scale
  • Does not allow for job-specific movements such as lifting/carrying, reaching at various levels, stair climbing, and ladder climbing.
  • Requires criterion-related validity, which only occurs by collecting data from a large population of the work force to establish “cut scores”. This requires substantial human resources and costs to complete, and most employers/job analysts skip this step – resulting in cut scores that are not job-specific thus leading to disparate impact as noted in several recent cases.
  • Studies have shown isokinetic trunk testing was of no value in employee selection – isokinetic measures of trunk muscles were not found to predict future cases of occupational low back pain (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8138847/)

Court Cases:

Physical Fitness Testing

Pros:

  • Works well for public safety-sensitive positions such as law enforcement, emergency medical, firefighters

Cons:

  • The test tasks correlate to the job tasks, but do not simulate the job tasks
  • Requires criterion-related validity, which only occurs by collecting data from a large population of the work force to establish “cut scores”. This requires substantial human resources and costs to complete, and most employers/job analysts skip this step – resulting in cut scores that are not job-specific thus leading to disparate impact as noted in several recent cases.

Court Cases:

These tests were not job-specific and were deemed to be discriminatory by the EEOC.   

Electrodiagnostic Functional Assessment Testing1

Pros:

  • Provides baseline info for the body parts recorded in the event of injury using surface EMG.
  • Can be performed by a trained tech

Cons:

  • Provides baseline info for the body parts recorded in the event of injury using surface EMG.
  • Can be performed by a trained tech

Court Cases:

In this case, the court ruled the orthopedic surgeon was correct in asserting the EFA was not valid and didn’t correspond/correlate to his physical exam and medical history findings. The employer lost the case and had to compensate the injured employee.

Slide deck of the primary company utilizing EFA

1 - Baseline Testing once hired or already employed

Types of Functional/Physical Abilities Tests.

Independent of methodologies, there are different test formats that can be used, depending on the goals and business requirements of your organization for testing the functions of a job.

Post-Offer 
Comprehensive Test

Benefits:

  • Medical history questionnaire  - increased level of safety for candidate and employer to ensure a medical threat isn’t imminent
  • Musculoskeletal exam  - allows employer to document current limitation in the event someone
    is hired but injured later in employment
  • Dynamic lifting  - safety measure for candidate during testing Job-Specific Tasks  - actually measures the actual job tasks

Limitations:

  • More expensive than a Physical Agility Test (PAT)
  • Has a higher “not capable” rate than PAT due to medical measures
  • Takes longer to administer than a PAT.
  • Requires a therapist (PT/OT) to perform due to musculoskeletal exam.
  • Requires more room than PAT due to need for exam table(s)

Notes:

  • Gold standard of physical ability/functional testing
  • Must have a scientifically rigorous physical demands/job analysis performed to ensure job-specificity

Physical Agility Test 
(Post Offer) 

Benefits:

  • Dynamic lifting
  • Job-Specific Tasks
  • A strategic consideration for tight labor markets
  • Less expensive than Comprehensive Exam (CE)
  • Can be performed by ATs
  • Quicker to perform than CE
  • Does not require as much room as CE due to no need for exam table(s).

Limitations:

  • No medical measures/musculoskeletal exam shifts risks to employee during tests and to employer in post injury scenario
  • Only determines if person can perform material handling duties and body positions associated with job tasks

Notes:

  • Must have a scientifically rigorous physical demands/job analysis performed to ensure job-specificity

Fit For Duty Testing 
(Post Employment) 

Benefits:

  • Determines if a person returning from illness/injury (work-related or not) is able to safely perform the physical demands of the job.
  • Same job-specific test as CE or PAT

Limitations:

  • Unable to perform comprehensive medical history/musculoskeletal exam – can only look at the involved body part.
  • Must be performed by a PT/OT.

Notes:

  • Not as popular or as well-received by clients compared to testing job candidates for initial hire (CE and PAT)

Employee Testing Legalities and Case Law

Comment 307

Implementing Testing.

To best implement an Employee Testing program at your organization, ensure you engage with a knowledgeable partner who can provide guidance and solutions tailored to your needs.

  • An implementation roadmap considerate of your Human Resources and Legal stakeholders and works within the parameters of your current structure.
  • Coordination of near-site and on-site options to provide flexibility when and where it is needed for your Employee Testing program.
  • Quick turnaround time – including the ability to remove the burden of scheduling and report gathering – to get your candidates through the process promptly.
  • Experience in Job Analysis and Validation processes to construct ADA/EEOC-compliant, legally defensible tests – getting you compliant and keeping you there.

In essence, partner with an employee testing authority who will be by your side to create and continually optimize a program that is easy for you to manage, provides a good experience for your candidates, keeps you in compliance, and enhances your business practices.

Foundation of Employee Testing.

Legal Compliance.

  • WorkSTEPS protocols continuously reviewed by national employment labor law firm
  • Compliant with all federal rules and regulations governing post-offer testing program, including ADA, ADAA, FMLA, EEOC, OFCCP, etc. ​
  • In almost 40 years and through millions of tests, zero successful ADA and EEOC challenges against WorkSTEPS protocol.
  • Unmatched validity through PAVETM

Business Case.

  • Average reduction of 50% in musculoskeletal injuries first year following implementation
  • Continued reductions in following years as you continue to screen out the candidates who absent of the screen would have been injured
  • Baseline data can be used in remediation of future claims or in apportionment (in most states).
  • Significant reductions in group health plan medical costs, prescription drug costs, short-term disability claims and employee turnover.

Get Started

Top-tier companies create their occupational health programs with WorkSTEPS.