A while back I had a job interview that went great, except that the manager had me take a profiling test prior to the interview and apparently refused to hire people that did not get a certain result on the test.
Thing is, the test was absolutely ridiculous. It wasn't based on astrology or anything, but the questions were completely ambiguous and poorly designed. They asked questions that you could answer both ways regardless of your personality type, and used terms that had slightly different underpinnings that affected the outcome of the question in ways they didn't account for. The company had no scientific foundation for their claims either. To see what I am speaking of in detail, see this other thread where I outline the issues in detail:
http://www.actuarialoutpost.com/actu...d.php?t=112340
Anyways my question is has there ever been any kind of cases where someone tried to sue a company like this for poor reports on someone's character? I have read scientific studies claiming that these things have a poor correlation with job performance as well as hearing the same from employees. I feel like the company is harming the free market by constricting free flow of information... arbitrarily reducing the labor pool/ available jobs etc. Also if it is clear that someone cannot be identified by their poorly designed test they probably just give a negative on the person so the company they service doesn't become populated by people who think the test is worthless...

