Hiring IQ testing is the best way to determine a person's ability to perform a task. This is demonstrated by the fact that “it is illegal to draft anyone with an IQ lower than 83 into the U.S. military.” This was created by the fact that people with an IQ below 83 are unable to perform any task or be trained in any job in the military. This same law applies to all federal government jobs. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay Although it is illegal to test a person's IQ for hiring purposes, the U.S. government uses the Civil Service Test and the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) to test IQ. So to determine if the person is worth hiring; however, the private sector, if it has 15 or more employees, legally cannot. Because they then fall under the laws of the United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). This mandate consequently involves hiring employees based on race, gender and sexual orientation. The argument made in news outlets and activist groups is that IQ tests are biased. Relying on the belief that the outcome is not the same is discriminatory. Some of the examples from EEOC court cases that show this belief in action where EEOC VS. Dial Corporation. Dial Corp. had an employee injury problem and found the solution to a physical ability test for employment. Dial Corp. would task the new hire with lifting and carrying a 25-pound box and a 50-pound box through the building. If the person could do it, they would hire them. If they were unable to carry out the task they would be placed in other jobs in the company or not hired. The EEOC argued in the court case that the test was “biased against women.” As a result, half of the women who applied and took the test were not hired under the old hiring process. According to Dial Corp., the test added to the hiring process had the desired result of reducing employee injuries, improving workplace safety and costs related to injured employees. I personally believe that Dial Corp. had every right to do the testing and was right. However, they lost the case because they had no lower standards for female candidates and applied the test the same way, ignoring hiring findings on race and gender. Now the question is: was the test truly biased against women or did it contain an unwanted truth? The EEOC, a single-job board to identify unequal employment opportunities and outcomes, says the test was biased. Another example was the EEOC against the US auto industry. An EEOC case had determined that the Apprenticeship Training Selection System (ATSS) discriminated against African Americans. This was determined by Rule 4/5 of the Uniform Guidelines for Employee Selection (UGES). The EEOC determined that the ATSS had a racial bias due to the lower number of African American applicants it hired. The ATSS was a cognitive test just like the SSAT used for college and the ASVAB for the military. It tested the person's cognitive ability; however, companies did not assign additional points to scores based on race, sex and disability. Please note: this is just an example. Get a custom paper from our expert writers now. Get a Custom Essay In Conclusion of Court Cases Against Dial.