They can, if they reveal enough information about candidates’ mental states.

In one court case, three rejected job applicants sued after they failed a pre-employment personality test given by the employer.

The company gave the tests to determine whether applicants had the right personality traits for the job.

The problem: The test was similar to those used by psychologists to determine if patients suffer from mental disorders such as depression, hysteria and paranoia. For example, applicants were asked if they:
» hear voices without knowing where they are coming from
» have fits of laughing and crying that they cannot control, and
» have a habit of counting things that are not important.

Therefore, the applicants claimed, the test was a medical examination, and the company violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by giving applicants a medical exam before they were offered jobs.

The company argued that the test wasn’t a medical exam because it wasn’t interpreted by a doctor.

But the court disagreed. Since the test revealed symptoms of personality disorders, it was considered a medical examination under the ADA, and using it before jobs were offered was a violation of the law.

Cite: Karraker v. Rent-a-Center, Inc.

They can, if they reveal enough information about candidates’ mental states.

In one court case, three rejected job applicants sued after they failed a pre-employment personality test given by the employer.

The company gave the tests to determine whether applicants had the right personality traits for the job.

The problem: The test was similar to those used by psychologists to determine if patients suffer from mental disorders such as depression, hysteria and paranoia. For example, applicants were asked if they:
» hear voices without knowing where they are coming from
» have fits of laughing and crying that they cannot control, and
» have a habit of counting things that are not important.

Therefore, the applicants claimed, the test was a medical examination, and the company violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by giving applicants a medical exam before they were offered jobs.

The company argued that the test wasn’t a medical exam because it wasn’t interpreted by a doctor.

But the court disagreed. Since the test revealed symptoms of personality disorders, it was considered a medical examination under the ADA, and using it before jobs were offered was a violation of the law.

Cite: Karraker v. Rent-a-Center, Inc.

When I was getting my MBA, I got poor grades on some purely quantitative assignments because I gave answers that reflected my values. Finally, I “cracked the code” meaning I realized I needed to simply regurgitate the specified formula and answer. The test was to see if I had mastered the specific skills. It was not to see if I had good judgment or great values or critical thinking skills. Those things come into play later, in a job – or in a job seeker's situation, an interview.

As you imply, the point of these employment tests is to screen people out and reduce the volume of applicants to be interviewed. Because they are computer-rated, the tests do not and perhaps cannot assess anything beyond very simple answers to the questions. So my suggestion is to just keep it simple and not overthink when answering those questions.

My question to you is: Do you really want to work for a company that uses these tests? It's a cookie-cutter approach and you don't seem like a cookie-cutter person. Thus, it doesn't sound like you'd be a good culture fit with that kind of company. Yes, it's unfortunate that an opportunity is closed off to you because of this screening mechanism. Yet is it really an opportunity you want? You'll be making choices about where to focus your energy anyway; this kind of “barrier to employment” reduces your choices, which you can see as a good thing. My comments are not intended to “blame” anyone, simply to suggest that there is plenty of useful information you can glean both from the tests and the fact that a company uses them.

Fortunately, many companies don't use these tests, including the ones you've successfully approached. One article mentioned that Whole Foods stopped using the Kronos test because it did not measure the things important to Whole Foods, namely job-specific skills.

I think there is something fishy with personality tests and that they are just a way for HR to put a score on what can't actually be scored. I think they may also work against people with higher reasoning skills who see more nuances and options than the multiple choice answers the test offers. I recommend that career experts go take a personality test or two themselves so they know what I'm talking about.