New Year Sale 2026! Hurry Up, Grab the Special Discount - Save 25% - Ends In 00:00:00 Coupon code: SAVE25
Welcome to Pass4Success

- Free Preparation Discussions

HRCI PHR Exam - Topic 4 Question 108 Discussion

Actual exam question for HRCI's PHR exam
Question #: 108
Topic #: 4
[All PHR Questions]

As an HR Professional you must be familiar with several different lawsuits and their affect on human resource practices today. What legal case found that a test that has an adverse impact on a protected class is still lawful as long as the test can be shown to be valid and job related?

Show Suggested Answer Hide Answer
Suggested Answer: C

The Railway Labor Act was a critical win for the management, in that it helped keep trains, and later airlines, from striking - to disrupt travel of citizens. The act was created to keep the trains moving - with a few exceptions, such as safety.

Answer option A is incorrect. The Clayton Act clarified language in the Sherman Antitrust Act, and deemed labor unions and agricultural unions exempt from the Sherman Antitrust Act.

Answer option D is incorrect. The National Industrial Recovery Act guaranteed laborers the right to organize and bargain collectively.

Answer option B is incorrect. The National Labor Relations Act, also known as the Wagner Act, guaranteed the right to self-organization, to form, join, or assist labor organization, to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choice.


Contribute your Thoughts:

0/2000 characters
Darrin
3 months ago
Albemarle Paper vs. Moody is also a key case to know!
upvoted 0 times
...
Kristel
3 months ago
Really? A test can still be valid even if it has adverse impact?
upvoted 0 times
...
Chara
3 months ago
No way, that can't be right!
upvoted 0 times
...
Christa
4 months ago
I thought it was Griggs vs. Duke Power, 1971.
upvoted 0 times
...
Lai
4 months ago
It's definitely Washington vs. Davis, 1976!
upvoted 0 times
...
Nathan
4 months ago
Albemarle Paper versus Moody sounds familiar, but I can't remember its specifics regarding test validity.
upvoted 0 times
...
Willard
4 months ago
I feel like McDonnell Douglas Corp. versus Green was more about discrimination in hiring practices, not tests.
upvoted 0 times
...
Latia
4 months ago
I remember studying Washington versus Davis, but I can't recall if it specifically addressed job-related tests.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tiara
5 months ago
I think the case we're looking for is Griggs versus Duke Power, but I'm not entirely sure if it was the one about adverse impact.
upvoted 0 times
...
Vallie
5 months ago
I'm feeling pretty confident about this one. The key case that established the "job-related and valid" standard for tests with adverse impact is Griggs v. Duke Power, which was decided in 1971. I'm going with B for this question.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tegan
5 months ago
Okay, let me see if I can work this out. I remember learning about the Griggs case, where the Supreme Court ruled that even if a test has a disparate impact, it can still be legal if it's proven to be job-related and valid. I think that's the right answer here.
upvoted 0 times
...
Tawanna
5 months ago
Hmm, I'm a little unsure on this one. I know there have been a lot of important employment law cases, but I can't quite remember the specifics of this one. I'll have to think it through carefully.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kimberely
5 months ago
I'm pretty sure this is asking about the Griggs v. Duke Power case, which established that employment tests with adverse impact on protected groups need to be job-related and valid.
upvoted 0 times
...
Macy
9 months ago
Wait, they're testing us on legal cases? I thought this was the 'How to Avoid Lawsuits 101' exam. Guess I'll have to use my trusty 'Plea the Fifth' strategy on this one.
upvoted 0 times
...
Buffy
9 months ago
D) Albemarle Paper versus Moody, 1975 - that's the one, I'm sure of it! Now, where did I put my crystal ball to predict the test questions?
upvoted 0 times
...
Rodolfo
9 months ago
A) Washington versus Davis, 1976 sounds familiar, but I can't quite remember the details. Guess I should have paid more attention in my HR law class.
upvoted 0 times
Hassie
8 months ago
D) Albemarle Paper versus Moody, 1975 focused on the issue of promotion practices and discrimination.
upvoted 0 times
...
Charlena
8 months ago
C) McDonnell Douglas Corp. versus Green, 1973 also dealt with employment discrimination, but in a different context.
upvoted 0 times
...
Allene
8 months ago
B) Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971 is the legal case that found a test with adverse impact on a protected class is still lawful if it can be shown to be valid and job related.
upvoted 0 times
...
Dorthy
8 months ago
A) Washington versus Davis, 1976 sounds familiar, but I can't quite remember the details. Guess I should have paid more attention in my HR law class.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Stephaine
10 months ago
Hmm, I'm not sure about this one. Can we get a hint? I've got a test tomorrow and I really need to ace it, even if it means I have to jump through a few hoops.
upvoted 0 times
King
8 months ago
D) Albemarle Paper versus Moody, 1975
upvoted 0 times
...
Jenifer
8 months ago
C) McDonnell Douglas Corp. versus Green, 1973
upvoted 0 times
...
Sarah
9 months ago
B) Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971
upvoted 0 times
...
Cortney
9 months ago
A) Washington versus Davis, 1976
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Janella
10 months ago
I think the answer is B) Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971. This case established the concept of disparate impact and the requirement for job-related testing.
upvoted 0 times
Timothy
9 months ago
It's important for HR professionals to be familiar with these legal cases and their impact on human resource practices.
upvoted 0 times
...
Rory
9 months ago
That's correct, this case established the concept of disparate impact and the requirement for job-related testing.
upvoted 0 times
...
Kathryn
9 months ago
I agree, the answer is B) Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971.
upvoted 0 times
...
...
Portia
11 months ago
Actually, Ronald, you are correct. The case of Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971, established that a test with adverse impact must be shown to be valid and job related to be lawful.
upvoted 0 times
...
Ronald
11 months ago
I disagree, I believe the correct answer is B) Griggs versus Duke Power, 1971.
upvoted 0 times
...
Portia
11 months ago
I think the answer is A) Washington versus Davis, 1976.
upvoted 0 times
...

Save Cancel