Pre-employment screening for aerobic capacity: Pitfalls and missed opportunities

Millions of U.S. workers are employed in physically demanding jobs that require lifting and manual handling of heavy loads.  The demanding nature of their work has resulted in a large toll of pain and suffering for employees and unacceptably high direct and indirect costs for industry.   In response employers have grasped at a variety of strategies to reduce costs. Commercially available pre-employment tests are a popular option in an attempt to identify job applicants who may be at higher risk for injury. These tests may measure both physical strength and cardiovascular fitness. However, there are widespread concerns regarding the reliability and validity of the methods used to predict the maximum aerobic capacity (and indicator of cardiovascular fitness) of job candidates and insufficient scientific evidence supporting this overall approach to injury prevention.   

A case study will be presented regarding a group of incumbent uninjured employees who attempted to return to work following a lengthy dispute and failed a screening test that intended to estimate their maximum aerobic capacity. This fitness test protocol selected by the employer’s subcontractor was developed for clinical or research settings and is not validated for application in pre-employment screening tests. Selection of unproven screening methods may present an unintentional source of discrimination against individual job applicants who are capable of performing physically demanding work but are denied employment. Resources invested in injury prevention should rely on an evidence-based ergonomics approach that identifies and analyzes hazardous job tasks, mitigates exposure to known risk factors and implements best practices.