Post-offer tests spot concerns before claims

The premise behind gauging the health and capabilities of a new hire to help weed out workers who might not be able to physically perform essential job duties is that the practice can lead to a reduction in workers compensation claims, experts say. 

Dubbed post-offer employment testing, the examinations should create “a microcosm of the workday,” said Daniel Sanchez, Jacksonville, Florida-based vice president of operations for OnSite Physio LLC. 

The test should include the essential functions of the job, how many times over the course of an eight-hour shift those functions are repeated, the specific ways the tasks are performed, the time and effort each task requires and the space in which the tasks are performed.

On average, about 9% to 12% of candidates fail their post-offer tests, according to Mr. Sanchez, who added that the failure rate is “very dependent on the industry and the strenuous nature of the job.” 

The increasingly popular practice leads to savings, experts say, citing older, yet still relevant studies.

A 2011 study published in the journal Work found that post-offer physical capacity testing for work placement resulted in an overall decrease in shoulder injuries among workers and a 37% decrease in shoulder-related medical costs, and a 2005 study of nearly 2,500 published in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine found that candidates who failed to pass a post-offer functional capacity evaluation of the essential functions of their job had a 33% incidence of lower back injuries compared with just 3% of those who passed the test. 

Employers accustomed to seeing a number of musculoskeletal disorders, or cumulative trauma injuries, in particular can see a reduction in such injuries and corresponding workers compensation claims from implementing such post-offer employment testing, said Michelle Despres, vice president and national product leader of physical therapy at Jacksonville, Florida-based One Call Care Management Inc.

And employers are particularly vulnerable to such claims in the first year of employment, experts say.

One key to successfully creating a post-offer employment test is ensuring that the designer of the test understands all of the essential functions of a job, said Ben Haynes, Centennial, Colorado-based program manager of workforce solutions at Briotix Inc., a workplace rehabilitation and injury prevention provider. 

For example, for designing a test for a baggage handler, an employer would gauge whether a worker can lift the maximum weight bags a set number of times, measure their ability to use the necessary force to push and pull cargo doors and carts, observe whether a new hire can kneel in a confined space, such as the cargo area, and continue to lift, push or pull baggage, and rotate their bodies to stack baggage while in those awkward positions, he said. 

Tests need to be tailored to specific job categories, Ms. Despres said. For instance, an airline saw a high rate of injuries reported by gate agents and began testing that job category for a new hire’s ability to lift a suitcase off a scale and haul to a nearby conveyor belt, she said. 

Briotix’s clients report an average worker test failure rate of about 12%, said Bob Stoner, Denver-based senior vice president of workforce solutions at Briotix Inc.

A post-offer, fit-for-duty screening can also catch previous injuries, Ms. Despres said. For instance, if a worker with a limited range of motion in one shoulder from a previous injury is hired and later files a claim for that same shoulder, that degree of prior impairment will be on record, and maximum medical improvement will be when he is able to move his shoulder back to that prior level, she said. 

“It could change the whole end of that claim,” Ms. Despres said. “It could also change an impairment rating in states that allow for apportionment” for disability.

Some employers use the tests for return to work purposes as well to determine if an injured worker is fit for return to duty or for competence testing, experts say. 

“Some companies use it for baselining annually,” she said. “If someone fails a part of it, the company may have in place a remedial program” for the worker or a “boot camp” of sorts to improve the employee’s strength.

The tests also can weed out people who never show up for testing or don’t respond to attempts to schedule, Mr. Sanchez said, and one of his clients counts those cases in its test failure rates because, “in their minds, that person would have been a headache to work with.”

But this type of testing isn’t beneficial for all employers. 

For instance, a preventive program is a better fit for companies with high turnover rates, Ms. Despres said. And those with low injury rates are “probably doing something right” and would also not benefit, Mr. Sanchez said.