Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-vhqbp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-10T11:13:03.203Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 23 - Twenty Questions about Employment Testing Bias and Unfairness in the United Kingdom

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

In Great Britain, the Equality Act 2010 provides protection from discrimination across services, work, and education. Given its application across contexts, a non-prescriptive, case-by-case approach considering the context and available evidence is taken to determine whether employment decisions have a discriminatory impact. When there is a claim of unlawful discrimination, employers may be required to provide relevant evidence that the selection procedure represents a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Where it is more prescriptive is in cases of indirect discrimination (disparate impact), with its two-step process for burden of proof, where claimants must first provide sufficient evidence of unlawful discrimination before employers must then provide adequate evidence against the case. However, methods and thresholds for testing disparate impact are not defined. As such, practitioners in the UK can look to guidance and regulations in other more stringent jurisdictions, such as the US, where guidance is more developed, for best practices regarding specific approaches to testing for bias and fairness in selection procedures.

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

American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and National Council on Measurement in Education (2014). Standards for educational and psychological testing. American Psychological Association (APA).Google Scholar
Arthur, W., Jr, and Villado, A. J. (2008). The importance of distinguishing between constructs and methods when comparing predictors in personnel selection research and practice. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(2), 435442. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.2.435CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baron, H., and Bartram, D. (2006). Using online assessment tools for recruitment. https://cms.bps.org.uk/sites/default/files/2022-07/using_online_assessment_tools_for_recruitment.pdfGoogle Scholar
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (1978). Uniform guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures. Federal Register, 43(166), 38290–38315.Google Scholar
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (2022). The Americans with Disabilities Act and the Use of Software, Algorithms, and Artificial Intelligence to Assess Job Applicants and Employees\U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. https://data.aclum.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/EOCC_www_eeoc_gov_laws_guidance_americans-disabilities-act-and-use-software-algorithms-and-artificial-intelligence.pdfGoogle Scholar
Equality and Human Rights Commission (2018). Equality Act 2010. www.equalityhumanrights.com/equality/equality-act-2010Google Scholar
Equality and Human Rights Commission (2011). Equality Act 2010 Code of Practice Employment Statutory Code of Practice. www.equalityhumanrights.com/sites/default/files/employercode.pdfGoogle Scholar
Equality and Human Rights Commission (2023). Understanding legal definitions of discrimination and unlawful behaviour in the Equality Act.Google Scholar
Equality Hub, Government Equalities Office, & Race Disparity Unit (2023). Positive action in the workplace. www.gov.uk/government/publications/positive-action-in-the-workplace-guidance-for-employers/positive-action-in-the-workplaceGoogle Scholar
Financial Conduct Authority (2021). Reports about sexual and non-financial misconduct made to the FCA. www.fca.org.uk/freedom-information/reports-about-sexual-and-non-financial-misconduct-made-fcaGoogle Scholar
Financial Conduct Authority (2023). Diversity and inclusion in the financial sector-working together to drive change How to respond. www.fca.org.uk/publication/consultation/cp23-20.pdfGoogle Scholar
Fielding, S., Tiffin, P. A., Greatrix, R., Lee, A. J., Patterson, F., Nicholson, S., and Cleland, J. (2018). Do changing medical admissions practices in the UK impact on who is admitted? An interrupted time series analysis. BMJ Open, 8, 23274. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023274CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Football Association (2023). John Yems’ suspension increased after successful FA appeal. www.thefa.com/news/2023/apr/19/john-yems-suspension-increased-following-fa-appeal-20231904Google Scholar
Global Witness (2023a). Global Witness calls on EHRC and ICO to investigate Facebook for breaking anti-discrimination and data protection laws. www.globalwitness.org/en/press-releases/global-witness-calls-ehrc-and-ico-investigate-facebook-breaking-anti-discrimination-and-data-protection-laws/Google Scholar
Government Equalities Office and Equality and Human Rights Commission (2015). Equality Act 2010: guidance. www.gov.uk/guidance/equality-act-2010-guidanceGoogle Scholar
GOV.UK (2015). Employers: preventing discrimination: Discrimination in recruitment. www.gov.uk/employer-preventing-discrimination/recruitmentGoogle Scholar
Grennan, D. (2019). Justified? The breadth and limitations of the Equality Act justification defence and how to win the argument. Guildhall Chambers. www.guildhallchambers.co.uk/uploadedFiles/Justified_DG.pdfGoogle Scholar
Hilliard, A., Kazim, E., Bitsakis, T., and Leutner, F. (2022a). Measuring personality through images: Validating a forced-choice image-based assessment of the Big Five personality traits. Journal of Intelligence, 10(1), 12. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence10010012CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hilliard, A., Kazim, E., Bitsakis, T., and Leutner, F. (2022b). Scoring a forced-choice image-based assessment of personality: A comparison of machine learning, regression, and summative approaches. Acta Psychologica, 228, 103659. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.ACTPSY.2022.103659CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Information Commissioner’s Office (2023b). Join the Triboo Limited. https://ico.org.uk/action-weve-taken/enforcement/join-the-triboo-limited-mpn/Google Scholar
Information Commissioner’s Office (2024). ICO orders Serco Leisure to stop using facial recognition technology to monitor attendance of leisure centre employees. https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/media-centre/news-and-blogs/2024/02/ico-orders-serco-leisure-to-stop-using-facial-recognition-technology/Google Scholar
Lady Hale (2017). Essop and others (Appellants) v. Home Office (UKBA); Naeem (Respondent) and Naeem (Appellant) v Secretary of State for Justice (Respondent). www.supremecourt.uk/cases/docs/uksc-2015-0161-judgment.pdfGoogle Scholar
Lievens, F., Patterson, F., Corstjens, J., Martin, S., and Nicholson, S. (2016). Widening access in selection using situational judgement tests: Evidence from the UKCAT. Medical Education, 50(6), 624636. https://doi.org/10.1111/MEDU.13060CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meyer, D. (2023). Google accused of breaking European privacy law by hoarding personal data of potential job candidates for years. https://finance.yahoo.com/news/exclusive-google-accused-breaking-european-113453800.htmlGoogle Scholar
Ministry of Justice (2022). Tribunal Statistics Quarterly: July to September 2022. www.gov.uk/government/statistics/tribunal-statistics-quarterly-july-to-september-2022Google Scholar
National Audit Office (2017). Briefing for the Women and Equalities Committee: The Equality and Human Rights Commission. www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/Briefing-for-the-Women-and-Equalities-Committee.pdfGoogle Scholar
NHS England (2023). NHS Workforce Race Equality Standard (WRES) 2022 data analysis report for NHS trusts. www.england.nhs.uk/long-read/nhs-workforce-race-equality-standard-wres2022-data-analysis-report-for-nhs-trusts/Google Scholar
Pyper, D. (2018). Unfair dismissal: qualifying service rule. https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-8347/CBP-8347.pdfGoogle Scholar
R v. Secretary of State for Employment ex parte Equal Opportunities Commission (1994). www.bailii.org/uk/cases/UKHL/1994/2.htmlGoogle Scholar
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) (2018). Principles for the validation and use of personnel selection procedures, 5th ed. SIOP. https://doi.org/10.1017/iop.2018.195Google Scholar
Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology (SIOP) (2022). SIOP statement on the use of artificial intelligence (AI) for hiring: Guidance on the effective use of AI-based assessments. www.siop.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/06/SIOP-Statement-on-the-Use-of-Artificial-Intelligence.pdfGoogle Scholar
Trades Union Congress (2024). Artificial Intelligence (Regulation and Employment Rights) Bill. www.tuc.org.uk/research-analysis/reports/artificial-intelligence-regulation-and-employment-rights-bill?page=8#section_headerGoogle Scholar
Trades Union Congress (n.d.). How Ford’s striking women drove the Equal Pay Act. www.tuc.org.uk/workplace-guidance/case-studies/how-fords-striking-women-drove-equal-pay-actGoogle 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
×