Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-zzvtc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-08T00:36:21.502Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 7 - Twenty Questions about Employment Testing Bias and Unfairness in Germany

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 November 2025

Winfred Arthur, Jr.
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Dennis Doverspike
Affiliation:
George Mason University
Benjamin D. Schulte
Affiliation:
Texas A & M University
Get access

Summary

This chapter examines the legal and social context of employment testing bias and fairness in Germany. Germany’s legal framework emphasizes individual rights and experienced discrimination, rather than scrutinizing testing systems. The Holocaust’s legacy shapes German views on fairness, making “Rasse” (“race”) a loaded term. The chapter addresses demographics, including the large migrant population and debates on sex/gender equality. Key legal protections are enshrined in the “Grundgesetz” (Basic Law) and the General Act on Equal Treatment (“Allgemeines Gleichbehandlungsgesetz”). A German standard sets quality criteria for selection processes. Regulatory bodies – such as the Federal Anti-Discrimination Agency, works councils (“Betriebsrat,” representing employees’ interests in many German organizations), and the Disabled Employee Representative Body – address workplace discrimination, with the Betriebsrat able to veto selection methods. Legal recourse is limited to minor compensation. In summary, although German laws affect other areas of industrial, work, and organizational psychology, their impact on personnel selection science is rather low.

Information

Type
Chapter

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Ahrens, P. and Scheele, A. (2022). Game-changers for gender equality in Germany’s labour market? Corporate board quotas, pay transparency and temporary part-time work. German Politics, 31(1), 157176. https://doi.org/10.1080/09644008.2021.1984428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V. (DIN). (2016). Anforderungen an Verfahren und deren Einsatz bei berufsbezogenen Eignungsbeurteilungen [Requirements for proficiency assessment procedures and their implementation] (DIN 33430). Beuth.Google Scholar
Diekmann, J. and König, C. J. (2015). Personality testing in personnel selection: Love it? Leave it? Understand it! In Nikolaou, I. and Oostrom, J. (eds.), Employee recruitment, selection, and assessment: Contemporary issues for theory and practice (pp. 117135). Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth (2021). Zweites Führungspositionen-Gesetz – FüPoG II [Second Management Positions Act – FüPoG II]. https://www.bmbfsfj.bund.de/bmbfsfj/service/gesetze/zweites-fuehrungspositionengesetz-fuepog-2-164226.Google Scholar
Federal Statistical Office of Germany (2022a). 66 % der erwerbstätigen Mütter arbeiten Teilzeit, aber nur 7 % der Väter [66% of working mothers work part-time, but only 7% of fathers]. www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03/PD22_N012_12.html.Google Scholar
Federal Statistical Office of Germany (2022b). 952,000 arrivals from Ukraine from February to August 2022. www.destatis.de/EN/Press/2022/10/PE22_428_12411.html.Google Scholar
Federal Statistical Office of Germany (2022c). Gender Pay Gap 2021: Frauen verdienten pro Stunde weiterhin 18 % weniger als Männer [Gender pay gap 2021: Women continue to earn 18% less per hour than men]. www.destatis.de/DE/Presse/Pressemitteilungen/2022/03/PD22_088_621.html.Google Scholar
Federal Statistical Office of Germany (2022d). Well over one in four people in Germany had a migrant background in 2021. www.destatis.de/EN/Press/2022/04/PE22_162_125.html.Google Scholar
Federal Statistical Office of Germany (2025). Frauen in Führungspositionen [Women in leadership positions]. www.destatis.de/DE/Themen/Arbeit/Arbeitsmarkt/Qualitaet-Arbeit/Dimension-1/frauen-fuehrungspositionen.html.Google Scholar
Fokkema, M., Iliescu, D., Greiff, S., and Ziegler, M. (2022). Machine learning and prediction in psychological assessment: Some promises and pitfalls. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 38(3), 165175. https://doi.org/10.1027/1015-5759/a000714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hennig, J. and Nadler, A. (2020). Künstliche Intelligenz im Arbeitsrecht [Artificial intelligence in labor law]. In Hartmann, M. (ed.), KI & Recht kompakt (pp. 239256). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-61700-7_7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Organization for Standardization (2020). Assessment service deliveryProcedures and methods to assess people in work and organizational settingsPart 1: Requirements for the client (ISO Standard No. 10667-1:2020). www.iso.org/standard/74716.html.Google Scholar
König, C. J. and Langer, M. (2022). Machine learning in personnel selection. In Strohmeier, S. (ed.), Handbook of research on human resource management and artificial intelligence (pp. 149167). Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Kroll, E., Veit, S., and Ziegler, M. (2021). The discriminatory potential of modern recruitment trends: A mixed-method study from Germany. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 634376. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.634376.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lenhardt, U. and Beck, D. (2016). Prevalence and quality of workplace risk assessments: Findings from a representative company survey in Germany. Safety Science, 86, 4856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssci.2016.02.017.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
OpenAI (2023). ChatGPT (ChatGPT-3 version) [Large language model]. https://chat.openai.com/chat.Google Scholar
Stumpf, S., Leenen, W. R., and Scheitza, A. (2016). Adverse Impact in der Personalauswahl einer deutschen Behörde: Eine Analyse ethnischer Subgruppendifferenzen [Adverse impact in the personnel selection process of a German government authority: An analysis of ethnical subgroup differences]. German Journal of Human Resource Management, 31(1), 431. https://doi.org/10.1177/2397002216637289.Google Scholar
Wietfeld, A. C. (2016). Der Einsatz psychologischer Testverfahren bei der Personalauswahl: Grundlagen und rechtliche Bewertung [The use of psychological test for personnel selection: Background and legal evaluation]. Zeitschrift für Arbeitsrecht, 47(2), 215260. https://doi.org/10.1515/zfa-2016-0204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Accessibility standard: Unknown

Why this information is here

This section outlines the accessibility features of this content - including support for screen readers, full keyboard navigation and high-contrast display options. This may not be relevant for you.

Accessibility Information

Accessibility compliance for the PDF of this book is currently unknown and may be updated in the future.

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×