IQ Test

[HR Solutions]

YES the employer has the right to hire whom ever he wants. It was never about that!

Really ? !

Great then we agree

Good night hope everyone has a good night.

[tec0]

Right:

Thank you very much guys . We are not sure if we need an IQ test or an aptitude test. Would this be suitable for an aptitude test to see if people are perhaps suited to sales for eg.

Thank you very much. I am trying to narrow down exactly what I need. Is there a test that can pick up dyslexia ??

Yes they do Ian, and yes some do get past the starting blocks. But a lot of our work is done on a computer and an online package whereby you enter and work on candidates cv's on line, enter clients details etc, so they may have filled in a two page form correctly because they perhaps spent a few more minutes working on it, but then find out that she cannot spell correctly etc etc, either because she is rushed or they may be dyslexic etc etc. So I am trying to find an online test whereby we can try to pick theses things up earlier. have found some very basic ones which are not suitable because if you have half a brain cell for eg you can figure out the correct answers, so preferably need a test that can test Apptitude, dyslexia and IQ as well where we can test them at an interview stage.

It doesn't Adrian, but what it does show you is if the person can spell, write, think a little, and work out basic maths. And you can pick up if the person is dyslexic.

Nope not wasting money on formal stuff. My tests are fantastic and there will be no formal inquiry . They are applying for a job !!!!

So many people think that its "discrimination" when you don't get a job, but the bottom line is you don't get the job because you CANT DO the job !

Clearly you wish to implement some tests to see if people are capable or not but you have no intention as seen here to do it the right way.

Now when this “testing is done” your customers will be provided with a list of possible employees. Thus you are preforming a “service” and your customers are paying you for this service. Now they may or may not be aware of your selection process but it doesn't change fact that by administering the tests that you are performing a service.

This is not the same as giving an employee a practical challenge to see if they can do the job or not.
The employer/customer can do that to see if the person is combatant but is not the same as the IQ test. It is NOT.

All I am saying is think about what was stated here on this thread. Is this really the right way to do it? Is this the type of service you wish to give your customers?

Believe it or not I am actually trying to help you. Can you not see that what you are planning to do may not be ethical nor legal unless you do it the right way by enlisting the correct companies to do the job properly correctly.

[adrianh]

tec0 - some jobs require a higher than average IQ. The problem is that many people come along with many worthless certificates and one needs a way to see whether they are able to reason. Computer programming is a prime example, the fact that a person passes a basic course in a particular programming language does not mean that the person can think for themselves. I saw it over and over, even with graduates, some people can think and some people cannot. If HR puts out an ad for a job and he gets 500 responses he needs to have ways to find the best candidate, in reality there may be 100 people of the 500 suitable to do the job. The employer does not have the time or money or inclination to test 100 people, they want 5 at most, further; they want the best 5. Why would HR send 5 at random, he needs tools to be able to determine which ones are the best 5 and one of the tools happen to be IQ tests.

Ok, lets turn the situation on its head, you need a guy to work in your workshop for one day. You go to the local street corner and you let them know that you need a guy, 100 people surround you begging for a job. Clearly many of them can do the workut some of them can't speak english, some are very agressive, some look disinterested. So what do you do,, you cant take 100 people home to see if they can do the work, you quickly devise a plan to weed out the ones that are unsuitable, you dont want the ones that dont understand a word you are saying, you dont want the lazy ones, you dont want the ones that have never worked in a workshop etc. So you ask them question, you ask them whether they can weld, you ask them whether they have built anything before, you ask them simple arithemtic questions etc. The reason you ask all the question is because you need 1 person out of 100 to work for you and you dont have the time money or inclination to spend the entire day trsting 100 people to see whether they can do the work when administering a simple test will tell you which ones are clearly unsuitable.

[HR Solutions]

Believe it or not I am actually trying to help you.

Thanks so much for yor help tec ...

[IanF]

Teco
I am not going to get into a flaming war with you. But with the labour laws being so onerous on the employer they have to do a lot more screening before they hire anyone. Now you say some tests are illegal that may be. But if more obstacles and hoops to jump through are put in front of the the employer the less people they are going to employ. That is from my perspective.

I hope I write for everyone on this thread that we accept that you say IQ tests are illegal, lets move on from that and give constructive ideas on how to screen new employees.

Teco one trait which you show is tenacity which is good for a sales job, for your next job I suggest you look in that direction.

[HR Solutions]

Teco
I am not going to get into a flaming war with you. But with the labour laws being so onerous on the employer they have to do a lot more screening before they hire anyone. Now you say some tests are illegal that may be. But if more obstacles and hoops to jump through are put in front of the the employer the less people they are going to employ. That is from my perspective.

I hope I write for everyone on this thread that we accept that you say IQ tests are illegal, lets move on from that and give constructive ideas on how to screen new employees.

Teco one trait which you show is tenacity which is good for a sales job, for your next job I suggest you look in that direction.

Thanks Ian - yes you do definitely write for me as well. And yes I agree, we have had the flaming war already with tec, but he insists on carrying it on. Move on man, if you would like to think you are right then so be it !

[adrianh]

HR - you did prove the need to use IQ tests as a measure of reasoning ability beyond a reasonable doubt - just think of the cost savings on flame suits!

[Citizen X]

Right:
Clearly you wish to implement some tests to see if people are capable or not but you have no intention as seen here to do it the right way.

Now when this “testing is done” your customers will be provided with a list of possible employees. Thus you are preforming a “service” and your customers are paying you for this service. Now they may or may not be aware of your selection process but it doesn't change fact that by administering the tests that you are performing a service.

This is not the same as giving an employee a practical challenge to see if they can do the job or not.
The employer/customer can do that to see if the person is combatant but is not the same as the IQ test. It is NOT.

All I am saying is think about what was stated here on this thread. Is this really the right way to do it? Is this the type of service you wish to give your customers?

Believe it or not I am actually trying to help you. Can you not see that what you are planning to do may not be ethical nor legal unless you do it the right way by enlisting the correct companies to do the job properly correctly.

Good morning gentlepeople,

Trusting that you well on this rather nippy second day of Spring(here in the South at least). You guys all defend your positions with passion, that’s commendable!

Call it academic curiosity or test by ability in practice, then, I think Tec0 makes a pretty good as well as damning case.

I simply must give him due on the points he has raised and the manner in which he then motivated his position. I also admire his ability to provide well-reasoned arguments.

One can at times do a stunning thing in the moment and turn an argument towards a complete different trajectory!

The grass roots of it is that one has many a misconception when the term ‘Marxist,’ is used, it associated with no regard for religion[Even Stalin legalised Churches and other religious organisations during the war], status and money. This is further confused by the manner in which the erstwhile Soviet Union implemented its understanding of communism. They were privy to the writings of Karl Marx, but could never comprehend that Marx himself would have been disgusted at the manner in which they implemented a system based on true equality and common good.

It’s actually his influence which led to labour movements and eventually statutory provisions regarding all aspects of the employee. The State acknowledged that they too are a contender in that they too have staff! It has become common cause that this our current South African economy requires a vast labour force and do any other similar economic system.

Marx unfortunately never left a plan for an ideal Marxist State. He focused extensively on what he called ‘division of labour,’ and ‘specialisation.’ Besides his many other writings, though impressive but not practically useful as he was a philosopher, and thus done a stunning job of looking at a society from the perspective of its many millions.

Our South African labour history is very fascinating, the ‘employee,’ has demonstrated the great lengths he is willing to go to in in-order to make his dispute of right or socio economic demand known. Our South African labour force have demonstrated something that no one, including the Unions, could have ever anticipated in time or even close to the time, that is, how powerful in practical this energy among such a large number of people would flow. Many unions members have revoked their very own Union’s mandate towards them and embarked unprecedented levels of labour unrest.

The pivotal thing though that makes all our Labour Laws so entrenched is the very existence of our Constitution of 1996. Our Constitution is the supreme of our land and any law and/or conduct which is inconsistent with it will be declared invalid.
The Constitution endorses our various Labour Legislation and promotes its implementation.
Discrimination was at the heart of our previous system so both the interim and the final Constitution sought to rid our society of this plague.
The central idea was not to actually discriminate on any arbitrary or frivolous ground.


The question is not actually whether communism worked, its more one of: is capitalism working? We must concede to economic implosions in the last 100 years and the impact , including the last one has had on the world.
My final position is that if it were not for Marx, one could possibly even have a current situation where a woman to allowed one day off to give birth and report diligently to work to next day or face summary dismissal.
The latest amendment to the Labour Relations Act speaks to this move to entrench the Constitutional supreme stipulation to the right to fair labour practices, the right not to be discriminated against, and the right not to be unfairly dismissed.

By mere fact that an ‘applicant for employment,’ now enjoys so many commonly held rights with commonly utilized legal remedies and how the South African Human Rights Commission is reacted to matters of similar nature, I can see how our everyday South African now has the right to voice his disregard for certain conduct and bahaviour

[HR Solutions]

I simply must give him due on the points he has raised and the manner in which he then motivated his position. I also admire his ability to provide well-reasoned arguments.

Oh do you ?? So calling people ass**holes in previous threads is ok ? Personally it loses all credibility and people then just ignore the individual !

[Citizen X]

Oh do you ?? So calling people ass**holes in previous threads is ok ? Personally it loses all credibility and people then just ignore the individual !

I can only reasonably comment on what i'm currently seeing or what is currently at hand in this thread. To cross reference with any other trend will be an exhaustive exercise for anyone!