Selection procedures are designed with the goal to select the most qualified applicant for the job. A variety of selection tests are used in organizations today, including physical ability tests, which are often used in police agencies and fire departments. A total of 22 physical ability testing cases at the Appellate and Supreme Court level were identified to be included as part of a review to examine the outcome of litigation. Of the 22 cases, only 6 cases involved a female plaintiff, while 1 involved a Hispanic plaintiff. There were five race-based claims and nine gender-based claims (three of the gender-based were reverse discrimination cases). There was not a statistical difference between the number of race-based and gender-based claims. Only six cases had information regarding whether the test had been validated (four were validated, two were not). The courts ruled in favor of the defendant in the four cases where the test was validated. In all 22 cases, public safety was found to be an issue of concern. Of the 22 cases, 15 found for the defendant, 2 found for the plaintiff, and 3 were remanded, indicating that when public safety is a concern the defendant is likely to prevail. It was hypothesized that the courts would rule in favor of the defendant when the selection test was a work sample or job simulation versus a pure ability test. This hypothesis was not supported. For 20 of the 22 cases, no information was provided whether practice was offered to the applicant prior to testing. In the two cases where practice was offered, the defendant prevailed.

Despite the passage of The Civil Rights Act of 1964, women employed by an organization generally remain in the entry level positions, while their male counterparts are promoted throughout the organization's hierarchy. Although there are many theories that attempt to explain the reasons for this disparity between men and women in the workforce, one of the popular attributions is sexism. In this study, the investigator applied the theoretical framework of Modern Sexism to examine modern sexist attitudes toward female supervisors. Three hundred and twenty-two undergraduate students were asked to fill out several sexism measures and to evaluate vignettes of male and female managers exhibiting four different leadership styles. High scores on the sexism measures were related to lower evaluations for female managers when the rater was male, and the manager exhibited a consideration style of leadership. The findings in this study add to the understanding of sexism as it exists today, specifically toward female supervisors in the work setting.

This study examined the role of status (i.e., occupational position and gender) in the frequency and experience of workplace incivility. Participants were 89 university students over the age of 20 who currently were employed and completed measures assessing their experiences of incivility at work, the instigator of the incivility, and jobrelated outcomes (i.e., turnover intent, job satisfaction, and organizational commitment). Consistent with hypotheses, supervisors were more likely to be instigators of incivility than coworkers. Participants also reported lower job satisfaction when the instigator was a supervisor, and lower organizational commitment and higher turnover intent when the instigator was male. These results suggest that status does have some effect on the consequences of incivility.

Inaccurate ratings of job performance can have severe consequences for many organizations and the individuals in them. The present study examined conscientiousness and its relationship to performance rating accuracy and perceived difficulty in providing a rating. Rating accuracy was assessed by calculating deviations from true scores, while personality and perceptions of difficulty were acquired via self-report. Additionally, the relationship between perceptions of rating difficulty and the amount of information available for rating instrument items was investigated. The first two hypotheses were not supported, but as hypothesized, the relationship between rating difficulty and information available was negative and significant. Implications for future performance appraisal research are discussed.

Research indicates the importance of studying organizational justice and its impact. Further, research has indicated a relationship between perceptions of organizational justice and pay increase decisions. However, the present research is the first to incorporate the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) leave into the equation. In short, this research addressed whether an employee's absence for FMLA-covered reasons impacts the perceived justice of subsequent pay increases for that employee. Specifically, it was hypothesized that the employee's length of absence, tenure, performance, and/or pay increase would impact justice perceptions. Participants evaluated vignettes manipulating these factors, then rated the fairness of pay increase decisions. Results revealed that the employee's performance interacted with the amount of pay increase to account for the largest amount of variance injustice perceptions. However, a main effect for pay increase, an interaction between performance and the length of the employee's leave, and an interaction between performance, tenure, the length of the employee's leave, and the pay increase decision were observed. Finally, among employees who received a full pay increase, performance was the strongest predictor of justice perceptions.

Incivility is defined as rude and discourteous behavior or displaying a lack of regard for others. As indicated by prior research (e.g., Pearson, Andersson, & Porath. 2000), the frequency and conscquences of uncivil behavior may result in a decline in psychological well-being, reduced job satisfaction, decreased organizational commitment, and increased turnover. However, much of the research to date has examined the relationship between personally experienced incivility and an assortment of job outcomes (Andersson & Pearson, 1999; Cortina et al., 2001; Pearson et al., 2000). The current study is distinct in that it addressed some of the potential factors that are likely to lead to incivility. Specifically, this study examined how job governance, autonomy, interaction style, competition, and email reliance relate to a climate of incivility. Data for the study come from a national sample of law school faculty (N =1,300; 52% males; 86% white) who were members of the Association of American Law Schools (AALS). Results from a series of multiple regression analyses indicated that four of the five proposed antecedents (autonomy, interaction style, governance, and competition) were predictive of an uncivil workplace climate. Results also show that autonomy is a particularly strong predictor of incivility as demonstrated by a stepwise regression analysis. Implications for organizations are discussed.

Workplace incivility is defined as rude and discourteous behavior that takes place in a work setting. Research shows that this type of behavior can negatively affect the well-being of employees who are the targets. However, the impact of workplace incivility may differ from person to person. One variable that may play a role in how workplace incivility affects an individual is U.S. region and whether or not they are located in a culture of honor. In cultures of honor, such as the Southern U.S. region, individuals are theorized to be especially sensitive to insults or challenges to their reputation. Using archival data from a national sample of law school faculty members (N = 1,300), this study examined the effect of workplace incivility on employees who are located in the Southern U.S. compared to employees located in the Northern U.S.. Findings showed that workplace incivility caused northern (non-culture of honor) law school faculty members to experience higher feelings of turnover intentions, occupational stress, and job burnout then southern (culture of honor) law school faculty members.

As more women enter the workforce, employers are increasingly faced with issues such as pregnancy leave. This study addresses perceptions of faculty pregnancy leave practices in a university setting. In part, this study is a replication/follow-up to a study conducted in 1995 on the perceptions of procedural justice when establishing a maternity leave policy. This study examined current pregnancy leave practices and faculty and department head perceptions of fairness of such leave to the pregnant faculty member and other faculty members. Options used most frequently in 1995 are still the options most frequently used by department heads in 2005. Faculty and department heads were in agreement about the options they are most willing to use, option fairness to pregnant faculty, and option fairness to other faculty. Only one of the three options that required more effort from other faculty to cover pregnancy leave was perceived as less fair to other faculty by department heads and faculty members. That option was the one in which the faculty member received no compensation for covering classes. Department head ratings of willingness to use an option were related to their ratings of fairness to pregnant faculty and related to the perceived fairness of that option to other faculty members. Both department heads and faculty perceived the participative decision-making method to be more appropriate for determining which option to use to cover pregnancy leave. The data from this research should prove useful to department heads, deans, and faculty members as they determine which options will be used to determine class coverage for pregnancy leave.

The purpose of this study was to investigate group identification and group cohesion as moderators of the relationship between observed incivility and job outcomes. Participants included 36 men and 54 women from a property management company who completed scales assessing observed incivility in their workgroup, feelings of workgroup cohesion and identification, and job related outcomes (e.g., job satisfaction, burnout, turnover intentions, and affective organizational commitment). Results showed that observing incivility at work was directly related to turnover intentions for employees. Results also showed that employees who perceived their workgroup as highly cohesive reported being less committed to the organization. Additionally, results showed that employees who were low on group identification and perceived their workgroup as cohesive reported the lowest levels of job satisfaction. These results held even after controlling for personally experienced incivility and negative affectivity. The present study is an important expansion to existing incivility research and suggests that incivility is an important organizational issue.

Existing measures of attitudes toward individuals with a disability have been shown to suffer from several shortcomings in their application in organizational settings. Indirect measurement has been beyond the scope of most organizations due to the complex and expensive implementation of these methods. Direct measures have been shown to be susceptible to threats to internal validity, such as reactivity and socially desirable responding. Further, existing direct measures have focused on unidimensional aspects of attitudes toward individuals with disabilities. Research, however, has demonstrated that attitudes are multidimensional in nature. There is a need for a multidimensional scale to tap those underlying factors. This study involves the development of a multidimensional, paper and pencil measure of attitudes toward individuals with a disability.