Employees assigned to the sausage packing area of a meat processing plant have a physically demanding job. They walk the equivalent of four miles a day and are required to lift approximately 35 pounds of sausage at a time to heights as high as five feet. Employees working in this area experience a disproportionate number of injuries. To deal with this problem, Dial instituted job rotation and several other changes to the work process and equipment. In addition, they instituted a strength test called the “Work Tolerance Screen” (WTS). Job applicants were asked to carry a 35 pound bar between two frames and to lift and load the bar onto these frames (set at heights similar to those of the sausage storing racks). They were told to work at their own pace for seven minutes. Their performance, including the number of lifts completed, was observed. The EEOC sued on behalf of a group of 54 women who were denied jobs after taking the WTS (about half had been unable to complete the test). 

1. What was the legal issue in this case? What did the court decide?

2. What is the evidence that use of the strength test disadvantaged women?

3. What is “content validity“? What is “criterion validity“? How did the employer attempt to show the validity of the strength test? Why was the court not convinced?

4. What should Dial do at this point?