Koch and Sons Trucking Fined $500,000 in Discrimination Case

"Employers have to demonstrate with valid evidence that the tests they use can actually predict the outcomes they are looking for.”
​

This is one of those areas where the intent may be good but the execution is bad. So many parts of driver testing and qualifications are based on faulty logic or are executed in a dumb manner (see multiple guess tests).

The really dumb thing is the Koch could have easily beaten this if they instantly made changes to the program once the complaint was lodged.

 

Soon it'll be determined that being able to safely drive a truck at all will be discriminatory. This is a flatbed and specialized hauling company, isn't it? Whats wrong with making sure you have the ability to tarp loads and chain equipment down?

 

This kind of thing reminds me of the trans people who are slaughtering the records set by women in their sports, only this is the other way around. It will be new people who can’t do the job but they won’t be able to fire them.

 

All the Koch trucks I’ve seen were dry van, why would anyone need to take a strength test to drive dry van?

 

Or maybe it was a bogus test that had no bearing on a person's ability to do the job?

Think of the fitness tests you did back in school - did the results have any correlation to the top athletes? At the very top and bottom, yes. For the middle 80%, not so much. There were a lot of doughy kids who did as many situps as the gymnasts. Do the test again, but this time don't have anyone holding their feet and the results are very different.

Koch had two options for beating this. First, show that the test had any kind of relationship/indicator to being successful at the job. The second was to say "oh, we didn't realize this was bogus, how can we do better?" It is VERY hard to prove these tests are discriminatory. The fact that Koch failed to do defend their practices speaks volumes.

I don't know what tests Koch was using, except that it appears they were isometric. Isometric muscle testing can provide very valuable data - provided weight, height and age are taken into account AND the test is conducted properly. That second point is surprisingly difficult. Back when I was coaching one of my athletes was doing a strength study and needed test subjects. One of the tests was an isometric pull and push. The test device was mounted on the wall and was (in theory) adjustable to make the cable horizontal at the height of the shoulder blades. I'm 6'3" - that cable was no where near horizontal which meant my results were not accurate. Anyone under 5'6" was having the same problem. The major conclusion of the student's paper was "data is flawed due so no conclusions can be drawn". I can not think of a way that anyone with any kinesiology background would think isometric testing would be a good pre-employment screening.

 

The article doesn't give much information...
Back in 2013 when I was researching companies, I contacted Koch and they said they had a physical aptitude test as part of the hiring process and I watched a video showing it.
So many companies have some kind of physical test regardless if driver must touch the load or not. They use this test not only to test driver's physical strength if required but also in order to protect themselves from fraudulent worker's comp claims.
The article said "the test disproportionately screened out women who had been given conditional offers of hire by Koch to work as truck drivers or who were required to take the test to return to work following an injury..." What does it mean by "disproportionately"?
Companies set a standard that drivers must achieve during each test, regardless of age, sex or physical condition. New hires should know or should have been informed about the tests and what was required from them before orientation.
Unless company were using a different set of standards between males and females, I don't understand what they mean by disproportionately.
If those drivers had been on a medical leave and were not able to perform the test when returning to work, there's no reason to say it was sex discrimination.
Depending on each case, when returning to work after medical leave, company may make some "exceptions" to the physical aptitude test if it finds necessary. But if they don't, why would that be discriminatory?
Maybe Koch learns whatever "lesson" they should learn and try a different test if they want to assess drivers' muscle skeletal injuries, how they are functioning, level of pain, etc without putting employees thru tests that may cause more injury.
This is what some companies use instead of the CRT test... at least employees don't have to lift heavy weights...

 

Yeah well try getting a 44k van that is 10 years old never greased to dolly up when fully loaded with paper rolls in 30 degree weather. About killed me and l am hefty man!

Used to have to do that out of IP in Rome, GA. Heck they have Made most of the new aero tractors for women (see Peterbilt rep showing off the 579 "Ultraloft" sleeper video) and with the autoshite and lane keeping might as well make the landing gear automatic also!! Heaven forbid you break a nail!

 

Many companies that offer 100% no touch freight do require new hires to be able to lift 50 to even 80lbs during orientation tests. I know a few.
Some give excuses such as, if you have a tire repair on the road, you must be able to put bad tire on the cat walk because repair person is not liable to do that.