How should employers document selection criteria? The 6th Circuit Court of Appeals recently upheld an employer’s use of a matrix of job-related criteria in its effort to determine which applicant was best qualified for an open position. Browning v. Dept. of the Army (6th Cir. 1/19/2006). Browning was among six individuals who applied for the position of Explosives and Handler Supervisor at the Blue Grass Army Depot. Using a matrix of five criteria drawn from the job description for the position that were deemed necessary to perform the job, the hiring manager selected the applicant with the highest total score. When he was not chosen, Browning filed a charge of age discrimination with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

The EEOC found Browning’s claim to be without merit, and he appealed to the federal courts. The 6th Circuit found that the criteria used by the hiring manager were job-related and were fairly applied to all applicants. The Court ruled that while there was subjectivity in the application of weights to the criteria, such subjectivity was within the employer’s discretion and it was not the Court’s job to second-guess the employer’s decision (emphasis added).

By having selection criteria that represented the essential elements of job performance found in the job description, the Army demonstrated the reasonableness of its selection decision. Courts are reluctant to reexamine decisions based on objectively relevant hiring criteria. Employers can insulate themselves from liability and discrimination law suits by periodically conducting job description audits and surveying hiring managers and employees about the job duties they perform to be sure the organization’s job descriptions are correct and up-to-date.

HR-OneSource assists employers with both the development and the audit of job descriptions. For any questions regarding job descriptions, please contact David Hansen of HR-OneSource’s at 515-221-1718.