Demands on local police and fire protection can only be expected to grow in the aftermath of the attacks on New York and Washington, D.C. and the creation of the Department of Homeland Security. Local public safety resources, already stretched thin, have been asked to assume more and more responsibility for the maintenance of public safety from a growing array of potential threats.

An important function of local government is to develop minimum requirements for Deputy Sheriff and Police Officer certification including the assurance that individuals placed in these jobs are physically capable of performing the work. This activity must be performed in accordance with the applicable state and federal fair employment laws.

The Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedure state that any test (for either new hires or employees) must be developed in accordance with "professionally accepted methods." Unless the employment tests are developed in a manner consistent with the Guidelines they cannot be defended. Agencies seeking to implement physical ability testing programs must comply with the Guidelines, if they are to have a reasonable chance of prevailing in a legal challenge.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended), the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Civil Rights Act of 1991 require that job applicants be tested in relation to the physical demands of the relevant job. In order to comply with these laws, the job must be scrutinized to separate essential functions from those which are not essential. If the applicant is failed and files a complaint, the employer must be prepared to demonstrate that the applicant cannot perform the physical demands of the job or would do so only at the detriment of the applicant or the employer.

It is our experience that a valid physical screening program must be based on a solid foundation of job analysis. A proper job analysis provides the basis for the development of a realistic physical ability test to help identify applicants who have the greatest probability of job success and the least probability of injury or illness.

Work Sample Tests

Simulation and work sample tests are deceptively simple. Seemingly straightforward and easy to construct, these tests have been subjected to countless legal challenges on a wide variety of grounds. Often these tests have been found deficient due to the lack of an adequate job analysis, lack of relationship between the job and test performance, and the arbitrary nature of the cutoff score, etc. Pass points have been set using unscientific and arbitrary formulas such as setting the pass point at the level of the lowest performing currently employed incumbent or even on the basis of how persons appear in videotape simulations. Often the job analysis is not comprehensive enough to support the test in the event of a legal challenge.

This is not to say that work samples cannot be properly developed. If constructed with care, such tests are very valuable in screening new hires or to determine if incumbent officers remain able to perform the functions of their job.

The MED-TOX approach to test validation involves the construction of both a work sample test and a physical ability test to allow for the criterion-related validation of both test types in a single study. The approach described below demonstrates how a work sample test can flow from a comprehensive job analysis and how physical ability tests can be developed based on those abilities used to perform the work sample tasks. This is the essence of criterion-related validity.

The MED-TOX approach involves assessing the content of at least seven North Little Rock occupations. According to Section 14C (2) of the Uniform Guidelines: