Management > Moral limits
Do you think there are moral limits on how far a prospective employer should delve into an applicant’s life by means of interviews, tests and background investigations? Explain your position.
When a company hires a candidate, it has to make sure that he/she is the best qualified for that position. It happens through a selection process, which is a process of screening job applicants to ensure that the most appropriate candidates are hired (Robbins and Decenzo 175). Employers try to predict which applicants will be successful if hired. This screening process however has its own limits in terms of privacy protection; where this limit is though can be questioned.
An employer has many legal devices that can help him/her in the selection process. These devices include application forms, tests, interviews and physical examinations. There has to be a proven relationship between the device used and some relevant measure. The law prohibits management from using any selection device that cannot be shown to be directly related to successful job performance. This goes for entrance tests too, it has to be proven that by achieving a high score on the test will result in a better performance on the job. Management therefore has to measure that it uses the appropriate selection device and that it is related to high job performance.
One favorite method in selecting a candidate for the job is personal interview. Most of us have to undergo interviews when applying for a job. No matter how qualified a person is for a position, if he/she performs poorly, there is a big chance for them being rejected. From a personal interview the recruiter can determine whether a person is a good fit for the organization in terms of motivation and interpersonal skills. This is I think also the most personal method of screening, because an employer can ask many personal questions from an applicant, and a direct response has to be given right on the spot. Often however this power to ask questions is abused, since it’s not clear for most candidates what questions can or cannot be asked.
Some questions are illegal, while some are legal but just inappropriate. The questions such as are you married, divorced, have children, pregnant or engaged might seem as irrelevant for performing a job. Not every state in the US however regards these as illegal. Even though it can lead to discrimination, they are allowed for recruiters to ask them. Under federal law, discrimination based on sex, religion, age, national origin and race are prohibited. Some applicants instantly recognize if a question is inappropriate or invasive, and can simply deny answering it. Another way of dealing with these kinds of questions is for the applicant to try drawing the conversation back to his/her professional qualifications, skills and experiences. It is common that women are asked about their marital status or whether they’re planning on starting a family, these questions are simply intrusive, and unethical, doesn’t at all relate to performance on a job. This kind of discrimination stands for men as well, there were instances where men were denied employment because they had children, and it would’ve cost the company a lot of money to provide the necessary medical benefits. College students can be refused as well, because the employers think that there is a big chance that the young applicant will fall in love at the workplace. It seems like nonsense, not to hire a qualified applicant because of his age, but it can happen. Some personal questions are legal to ask, such as those regarding previous conviction, or eligibility to work in the US.
It is therefore in the applicant’s best interest to find out which questions are illegal to ask, and which are the ones that he/she is obligated to give answer to. Unfortunately it’s still a common practice that recruiters ask questions that are illegal or unethical.
Printer Friendly Version or get
for quick editing, exporting, sharing