155 Use of subjective criteria in hiring

The commission agrees that subjective criteria, such as being a "go getter," being lazy, or appearing unhappy to be at work are valuable tools in assessing the respective qualifications of candidates for promotion. The commission also notes that, when a candidate is in a protected class and is in the minority in the workplace, it is appropriate for the fact finder to more closely scrutinize the use of such subjective criteria. Thobaben v. Cnty. of Waupaca Sheriff's Dept. (LIRC 12/23/11).

The use of subjective criterion in the selection process is not unlawful per se, and in fact the validity of suggestive criteria increases in direct proportion to the level of employment sought. Larson v. Tomah Police Dep’t (LIRC, 07/20/94).

The use of subjective criteria is not unlawful per se. The question is whether the selection criteria impermissibly burdens persons in a protected group. The validity of subjective devices increases in direct proportion to the level of employment sought. Gronning v. Sch. Dist. of Viroqua Area (LIRC, 07/28/93).

Nothing in the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act prohibits the use of subjective criteria in the evaluation of an employee’s performance. Many jobs involving managerial responsibilities require personal qualities that are not amenable to objective, standardized testing. However, subjective criteria must be closely scrutinized. Kemmerer v. City of Madison Police Dep’t (LIRC, 06/30/93).