Companies used to use IQ tests, and hence claim not be racist, and then be racist.
Companies still look at education, employment history, and ask questions that are trying to evaluate intellectual skills, interests, and abilities. Most of these will correlate with race pretty strongly, too. The entry-level job market is almost exclusively about checking for "good schooling and education".
What's particularly bad about IQ as compared to other measures of employability? Is it just that it's measuring skills that are non-job-specific, or is it actually more racially biased than other evaluation criteria?
I would naively think that IQ tests would be at least somewhat less sensitive to educational status than, for instance, looking directly at someone's educational background. In that case, would you similarly argue that looking at the "schooling" section of a person's resume is a way to claim not to be racist, and then be racist?
Companies still look at education, employment history, and ask questions that are trying to evaluate intellectual skills, interests, and abilities. Most of these will correlate with race pretty strongly, too. The entry-level job market is almost exclusively about checking for "good schooling and education".
What's particularly bad about IQ as compared to other measures of employability? Is it just that it's measuring skills that are non-job-specific, or is it actually more racially biased than other evaluation criteria?
I would naively think that IQ tests would be at least somewhat less sensitive to educational status than, for instance, looking directly at someone's educational background. In that case, would you similarly argue that looking at the "schooling" section of a person's resume is a way to claim not to be racist, and then be racist?