"Neeum Zawan" <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote in message
news:4b645169$1@news.povray.org...

> Yes, the objection may have been post-facto, but it wasn't an invalid
> objection. Had the test discriminated, and the FD made a valid case that
> the test is relevant to the job, then the status quo would have resumed.

92% of all interview questions are not relevant to the job (just like 89% of
all statistics that are made up). Why can a private employer ask an IT
applicant why manhole covers are round but city of government cannot test to
check if applicants can read and understand a simple passage?

Post a reply to this message