Introduction

What The Applicant Can Do is the keynote of the Job Qualification System for Trades and Labor Occupations. Under this system, how applicants gained their skill and knowledge or the length of time they have spent in a line of work are not as important as the fact that they have the required ability or potential to do the job.

The objectives in determining what the applicant can do are:

• To provide selecting supervisors with eligibles who have the skills, knowledge, abilities, and personal characteristics needed for the particular job being filled.
• To rank eligibles in terms of their qualifications so that the best qualified are considered first when there are more eligibles than vacancies.

In this system, the job element method is used to match what applicants can do against what the work calls for. The knowledge, skills, and abilities of applicants are compared with the knowledge, skills, and abilities (called job elements) needed for success. If applicants have the ability to do the work, they are considered eligible for the job.

Job element examining procedures permit flexibility in identifying the best qualified candidates with minimum time and effort. Alternative techniques can be used at the local level to better serve both the needs of management and the best interests of the general public, e.g., basic procedures and forms can be modified for use in in service placement, shortage recruiting, broadband examining, etc.

Three Major Steps in Job Element Examining

Step 1: Identifying job elements necessary for success on the job

The skills, knowledge, abilities, and personal characteristics important to success on the job vary according to the level and kind of job being filled. Some examples are as follows:

• Apprentice jobs. Elements measure potential to learn and advance.
• Jobs (other than trainee) requiring little or no skill knowledge. Elements typically measure:
  • reliability and dependability.
  • ability to follow simple directions.
  • ability to work safely.
  • possession of some degree of dexterity.
  • ability to do strenuous work.

• Jobs requiring specialized skills, training and experience. Elements measure knowledge, abilities, and personal characteristics directly associated with the job.

Of the elements selected, every job has one critical, overall element called the screen-out element. Applicants who clearly fail to meet the lowest acceptable requirements in the screen-out element can be rated ineligible without further review of their applications since this element measures the critical ability needed to successfully perform the duties of the job.  All necessary requirements and description of major duties should be in the job announcement.

Step 2: Developing the plan to measure qualifications of applicants

To decide which of the applicants are qualified, a plan must be devised to measure the applicants' skills, knowledge, abilities, and characteristics against the job elements identified in Step 1.

Kinds of acceptable experience, training, or other information for each element are grouped according to their relative worth to the job as follows:

Step 3: Rating applicants

Sufficient job information must be obtained to show the extent to which the applicant has acquired specific skills, knowledge, and abilities. Information requested must clearly relate to each of the elements being measured.

Sources of information used vary with the complexity of the job, size of the labor market, urgency in filling the job, and the extent of information needed to make judgments of an applicant's qualifications. Low level trades and labor jobs usually require little information while complex jobs require more.

Questions to applicants should be easy to understand and answer. To the extent possible, questions should permit simple responses such as checking a box or answering "yes" or "no."

The information is evaluated according to the plan developed in Step 2. A decision is made as to the applicant's degree of ability in each of the job elements. A final rating is then assigned to show the applicant's demonstrated or potential ability to do the job. This permits the selecting supervisor to give first consideration to the best qualified eligibles when filling a particular job.

Relationship Between Qualification and Job Grading Standards

Job grading standards describe levels of work in terms of the skills and knowledge, responsibilities, physical effort, and working conditions required at each level.

All jobs under the Federal Wage System will be graded on the basis of standards and instructions published by the Office of Personnel Management.

Qualification requirements should be basically consistent with the corresponding grade-level criteria in job grading standards. They are not identical, however. For example, certain personal characteristics such as "interest in the work" may be very useful in a qualification standard for predicting an applicant's potential for success on the job, but be of little or no use (and hence not included) in distinguishing between grade levels in the job grading standard.

Since any significant change in qualification requirements for a job may affect the grade of the job, staffing and position classification specialists should coordinate with each other to ensure that the relationship between qualification requirements and grade levels remains consistent.

Back to Top

Introduction

Sets of job elements (skills, knowledge, abilities, and personal characteristics considered necessary for success on the job) are approved by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management for individual occupations as well as for jobs having common requirements.  Jobs with common requirements such as apprentices and high-level supervisors are shown in the Examining Guides. Please note that changes may be made from time to time based on studies.

Using Approved Sets of Elements

In most instances the sets of approved job elements can be made suitable for local needs without change. If a particular ability is identified as being necessary for success on a particular job, it can usually be made part of the point value description in the crediting plan (described in the chapter on "Plan for Rating Applicants").  Screen-out element: The screen-out elements are the critical knowledge, skills, and abilities that are essential for satisfactory job performance.  Each job must contain at least one screen-out element among the identified job elements.  Applicants must receive a minimum of two points on the screen-out element(s) to be deemed eligible for consideration. Below are examples:

Element No. 1, Ability To Do the Work of the Position without More than Normal Supervision:

If a certain skill or ability is needed to do a job, it can usually be considered a part of Element No. 1. For example, if Ability to Keep Records and Make Reports is important to success on the job, it can be incorporated in the point value description for Element No. 1 in the crediting plan. It does not have to be formally added to the set of approved elements as a separate element.

Element No. 73, Ability To Lead or Supervise: 

For a supervisory job, it might appear that having only one element for supervisory ability is insufficient to assure that candidates with the greatest supervisory potential will be ranked highest. However, the supervisory requirements can be given appropriate weight in the crediting plan, without actually changing the set of elements, by describing the requirements for all of the elements pertinent to the job in terms of their supervisory aspects.

This approach can also be used for some mixed jobs and for jobs such as Supervisory Inspector, which encompass more than one basic kind of job.

Changing Sets of Approved Elements

There may be a few jobs which have requirements so different from the approved set of elements that job elements need to be added, re-titled, deleted, or a new set needs to be developed.

Elements other than the screen-out element

Elements may be added or re-titled to make them more specific to a certain job. Addition of elements should be based on a genuine need for a skill, knowledge, or ability that is not already represented in the general requirements.

A job element, other than the screen-out element, may be deleted from a set of approved elements when the skill, knowledge, or ability is not crucial to successful performance in a job. A job element may also be deleted by combining two related elements and treating them as one element in developing the plan for rating candidates. Reasons for deleting an element should be recorded and maintained with the appropriate crediting plan. The justification should show why it is not necessary to rate candidates on the element or in what manner the job elements are related so that combining the elements for rating purposes does not alter the minimum requirements. In any case, the quality of the rating should not be reduced by the change.

Screen-out element

The prescribed screen-out element cannot be deleted from a set of approved elements unless approved by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Back to Top

Job Element Categories

For the purpose of identifying sets of approved job elements, trades and labor jobs are grouped into five categories. The most populous group has jobs emphasizing trade knowledge, i.e., jobs requiring skill and knowledge in a particular line of work. The other four categories: worker-trainee, support, apprentice, and high-level supervisor - are jobs involving requirements common to a particular kind of job regardless of the occupation in which the job is located. These categories are discussed below in order from the lowest skill to the highest skill level.

Worker-trainee jobs

Jobs which require the ability to do one simple task at a time. The applicant needs no skills and knowledge before being hired.

The basic qualification needed for these jobs is willingness to do low-level work. Workers may do several types of simple tasks over a period of time. One is completed before a new assignment is given.

One set of approved elements is provided for these jobs no matter what line of work is involved.

Support jobs

Support jobs require the ability to do a series of simple tasks. The applicant does not need skills and knowledge of a particular line of work before being selected.

A separate set of elements is provided for each of the three kinds of jobs in this category. Each set is applicable to all lines of work. The jobs are described below:

• Jobs where neither ability to advance nor special aptitudes are essential.

• Jobs where ability to advance is not essential, but special aptitudes such as checking, sorting, counting, and record-keeping or characteristics such as cleanliness and neatness (important in food service work) are needed.

• Jobs where the ability to learn and advance is essential, e.g., helper-trainee.

Apprentice jobs

A separate set of elements is provided for each of the three levels of training included in the Apprentice category. Each set is applicable to all lines of work which have apprentice programs. The levels of training are described below:

• Beginning level: Jobs which require the ability to do the simple tasks in the line of work under close supervision. The applicant, before being selected, must demonstrate potential for learning and advancing.

• Middle level: Jobs which require the ability to do the less difficult of the common tasks in the line of work under close supervision. The applicant, before being selected, must possess the level of skills, knowledge, and abilities needed to demonstrate potential to do this work.

• Advanced level: Jobs which require the ability to do the common tasks in the line of work under close supervision. The applicant, before being selected, must possess the level of skills, knowledge, and abilities needed to demonstrate potential to do this work.

Jobs emphasizing trade knowledge

Jobs which require the applicant, before being selected, to possess skills and knowledge of a particular line of work.

Unlike jobs in the other categories, sets of elements for these jobs involve skills and knowledge which are identified with particular job families.

For each job family, six sets of elements are provided, one for each of the six possible kinds of jobs described below:

1. Jobs where the ability to do the less difficult tasks in the line of work is the prime ability needed (less than journeyman).

2. Jobs where either the ability to do the common tasks or the ability to do the complex tasks in the line of work is the prime ability needed (journeyman or higher level employee).

3. Jobs where the ability to inspect the work of others is the prime ability needed.

4. Jobs where the ability to instruct others is the prime ability needed.

5. Jobs where the ability to provide production support services such as planning and estimating for others is the prime ability needed.

6. Jobs where either the ability to lead or the ability to supervise others, up to and including the first full level of supervision, is the prime ability needed.

High-level supervisory jobs

Jobs which require the ability to supervise groups of workers through one or more levels of subordinate supervisors

These jobs are above the level described in paragraph "f" above. One set of approved elements is provided for high-level supervisory jobs, no matter what line of work is involved.

Back to Top

Plan For Rating Applicants

When an agency announces an examination for any occupation, it must have an examining plan. Plans for in service placement actions used by human resources or personnel offices follow the same basic principles as those used for outside hiring. The plan should include the job elements, a crediting plan for rating applicants, announcement information, forms, questionnaires to be used, and other rating information.

Ideally, a panel composed of examiners and agency operating officials who know the job requirements prepare the examining plan. In this way operating officials and other interested parties play a vital role in the examining process which is directly related to local job requirements. The number of panel members and the methods used vary, depending on the nature of the job, or jobs, and local considerations.

In preparing the examining plan, the panel can adapt material from examining guides to meet local requirements. For example, general instructions, announcement paragraphs, application forms, suggested crediting plans, and other appropriate material (not necessarily all of these in each case, however) may be included. 

Developing The Examining Plan

Developing the examining plan usually requires a number of steps:

1. Studying the job

   A thorough understanding of the work and the characteristics (or job elements) needed for success is necessary.

2. Identifying the job elements

   Identifying the proper set of elements for a particular job involves:
   • Deciding which of the five job categories is appropriate;
   • Comparing the job to be filled to those described in the category; and
   • Selecting the set of approved elements most appropriate for the job.
3. Deciding how to obtain information about applicants

   A decision must be made as to the best way to obtain information about the degree to which applicants possess required abilities. Forms or oral interviews designed to elicit this information should:

   • Have questions directly related to the elements for the job;
   • Be limited to relevant data needed to form valid judgments about the applicant's ability to do the job; and
   • Be worded in a manner that will be easily understood and answered by applicants.

   The selection of application forms, checklists, etc., depend on the nature of the job to be filled. Forms may be modified or new forms be developed for local use.

   1. Short-Answer Supplemental Experience Statement Sheets

      Supplemental experience sheets may be used to obtain more information from the applicant if necessary. Such forms should be kept simple, and, to the extent possible, they should not require skill in writing. In developing forms locally, rating guides may be used as a reference for the kinds of information usually needed in connection with job elements.

   2. Reference Checks or Qualification Questionnaires

      While reference checks or qualification questionnaires are not required, they may be useful to support or supplement information received from applicants:

      • When supervisors can be contacted easily;
      • When it is not practicable to get information from applicants; or
      • When there is some doubt concerning the statements made by an applicant.

      Qualification inquiries should be made of sources such as employers and schools when available information indicates the possible existence of an unfavorable record.

      If the desired information is obtained by telephone, the examiner should ask essentially the same questions that are asked on the application form, and a brief written summary of the information should be kept with the application.

      As in other examining procedures, present employers should not be contacted unless permission is given by applicants, and all information received should be considered confidential.

   3. Tests

      In deciding whether tests will be used, the value of the information to be obtained should be considered in relation to the availability of tests, their cost, and time factors.

      If tests are used as one indication of ability, the examining plan should provide complete information as to the type of test, its use in measuring an element, and a method of converting test results to point values.

4. Preparing the crediting plan

   Preparation of the crediting plan is one of the most important steps in examining for a job. The plan contains descriptions of specific kinds of acceptable experience, training, or other information for each element. Information illustrating degrees of potential or ability for an element are grouped as follows:

   • Demonstrated superior ability (4 points)
   • Demonstrated satisfactory ability (3 points)
   • Barely acceptable or potentially satisfactory ability (2 points)

   • Information which is of some value, but indicates less than barely acceptable ability (1 point)

   Point value descriptions are best prepared with the assistance of subject-matter experts who can describe the shop practices, materials, equipment, etc., using terminology of the occupation. They are usually developed after review of the applications received. In this manner, all of the possible kinds of information that will be needed in rating the applications are included. A good understanding of requirements is increased in group discussion; and a group interpretation tends to be more generally applicable than one adopted by an individual rater without consultation.

   After the crediting plan is prepared, it should be tested to be sure that it will be a useful tool in assessing the potential of applicants for success on the job, e.g., that the highly qualified applicants will be given the most credit, etc.

   1. Rating Guides

      Rating guides developed by the Office of Personnel Management are helpful in preparing local crediting plans.

      Each rating guide contains a definition of the particular job element; levels of ability within the element; work examples where appropriate; and typical questions that may be asked of competitors. These examples and descriptions are broad and general because the rating guides cover a variety of jobs in which the element is important.

      A rating guide has two major purposes:

      (1) It enables the panel to select the example that most nearly matches the level of ability required in the job to be filled. The example selected serves as a general description of demonstrated satisfactory ability (3-point value) and represents the mid-point of the eligibility range.

      (2) It provides a basis for developing point value descriptions in the local crediting plan. The general description of demonstrated satisfactory ability (3-point value) can be expanded to fit the local job requirement.

      Using the 3-point value description as a reference, often one of the higher levels of ability in the rating guide can be selected as a guide for the 4-point value description. Similarly, lower levels usually serve as guides in preparing 2 and 1-point value descriptions.

   2. Point Value Descriptions

      Point value descriptions should be developed for the particular job only in terms of actual local conditions, not on assumed requirements. However, the panel should avoid over specificity of requirements; for example, it would not be proper to require experience on the particular make and model of lathe used locally. A suggested method is described below:

      (1) 3-point value description:

      Each selected level of ability (3-point value from rating guide) is expanded to a more detailed and specific description. For example, the rating guide for the level "Ability to perform the common tasks associated with the journeyman duties in a line of work on employee's own initiative, subject to occasional inspection" for Element No. 1, could be expanded to read as follows for a WG-9 Carpenter job:

      Able to plan and complete work involving the construction of building additions and modifications (put up frameworks, rafters, bearings and trusses, frame windows and doors; install dry walls; complete trim work, etc.) obtaining exact trueness, precise fits and joints, and a finished appearance with structural soundness. Uses any of the accepted methods, techniques, and devices of the trade, with little or no advice from supervisor, except on unusual problems. Uses a variety of shop woodworking equipment and precision layout and measuring devices such as levels, plumb lines, and framing squares, as well as common hand and power tools. Able to read, interpret and apply building plans, specifications, sketches and material guides, and do arithmetic and simple geometry. Overall work is checked to see that it meets trade standards.

      (2) 4, 2, and 1-point value descriptions:

      After the 3-point value is described, it is used as a reference point to develop the 4, 2, and 1-point descriptions.

      A 4-point value description encompasses the 3-point description, but describes superior performance by ability to do common tasks with complete independence, or to do complex or unusual tasks and solve unusual problems.

      A 2-point value description covers barely acceptable or potential ability to perform at the level described for 3 points by ability to do common tasks under close supervision; by intermittent, occasional performance on an independent basis; or by other comparable indicators of ability.

      A 1-point value description covers ability which is of some value in the rating, but is not evidence of barely acceptable or potential ability to perform at the 3-point level.

      • Information that illustrates lower than the 1-point value need not be described.

   3. Supplemental Point Value Information

      It may be desirable and useful to supplement point value descriptions with examples of work experience and training, test scores, or other evidence of ability which may be obtained from applications, vouchers, discussions with panel members and other sources. Examples of this for a journeyman in a trade are as follows:

      • Four points might be illustrated by an applicant's statement that he served as a leader or first-line supervisor and has demonstrated ability as a satisfactory journeyman. Four points might also be shown by demonstrated superior ability of a journeyman as recognized by awards, supervisory appraisals, or other testimonials.

      • Two points might be shown by an example of work experience where common tasks associated with the journeyman job were performed under close supervision. Similar examples could be shown for each of the other point values.

   4. Adjusting the Crediting Plan

      During the rating of applications, if it becomes evident that an insufficient number of eligibles will be obtained, the 2-point criteria for each element should be checked to insure that requirements have not been overstated. (However, caution must be used to avoid lowering the criteria below the barely acceptable or potential ability level. Any significant reduction of qualification requirements may well dictate a reevaluation of the job to insure proper grade relationship.)

      If the crediting plan is correct, shortage recruiting procedures may be used.

   5. Testing the Crediting Plan

      Before the first group of applicants is notified of their ratings, the completed crediting plan should be tested to insure uniform interpretation and realistic rankings. Testing may be done as follows:

      (1) Testing with Employees:

      Supervisors select five or more employees who are considered to be excellent in job performance and five or more who are considered satisfactory. These employees should provide information similar to that required of applicants. They are then rated on the elements.

      If an excellent employee receives a low total score, or if a satisfactory employee receives a high total score, the crediting plan should be reviewed to see whether the proper amount of credit is being given for the various kinds of experience. Adjustments should be made accordingly.

      (2) Testing with Applicants:

      The panel selects a set of 10 to 15 applications which can be ranked fairly obviously from the poorest to the best on the basis of an overall judgment of each applicant's ability. Some papers should appear to be excellent and others poor, including probable ineligibles if possible. These applications are then rated and ranked on the elements.

      If the results of the two methods of ranking do not agree, a review of the total process should be made to determine whether the ranking on the basis of overall judgment was inaccurate, the crediting plan was incorrectly applied, or one or more of the point value descriptions in the crediting plan should be changed. Adjustments are made where needed.

      If the panel disagrees by more than one point on any single element, they should determine whether the difference resulted from their application of the crediting plan or from inconsistencies in the crediting plan and take appropriate action.

5. Devising the conversion table

   The conversion table is used for converting raw scores to a rating of from 70 to 100. It may be adjusted to fit the type of ranking needed for different situations. For instance, a total raw score of 22 with 6 elements converts to a rating of 95.0; a raw score of 17 with 5 elements converts to 91.0, etc. Veteran preference points, if any, are added to the converted rating to form the final rating.

6. Documenting the crediting plan

   All decisions, modifications, or interpretations made prior to or during the rating process are recorded in the crediting plan. This is especially important for kinds of experience and training that are considered to be non-qualifying for the screen-out element, whether described in the announcement or decided in the course of rating applications.

Back to Top

Issuing The Announcement

The announcement may be issued at any time after decisions are made on the job elements, tests (if appropriate), and application forms that are to be used.

Rating Applicants

In the rating process, raters use the examining plan as the basis for making judgments about available applicant information. Although specific rating instructions concerning the elements for the job and the point values to be assigned are helpful, good judgment of the rater is essential in arriving at final ratings.

In forming judgments about applicant information, raters should be mindful of the importance of the required ability in jobs the applicant has previously held; the conclusiveness of all the available evidence which can be used to prove how well the applicant is qualified; and the degree to which the applicant possesses the required ability.

Where possible, agency employees with a thorough knowledge of the trade should be called upon either as raters or as consultants to provide technical advice to raters. Raters with expert background in the trade or occupation can usually relate an applicant's claims to the kind of position he has held, and decide what the real nature of the experience and training has been. For example, an expert electronic mechanic would realize that a person whose assembly experience has been limited to assembling radio chassis should not be credited with working to finer tolerances than that required by such work.

Rating Considerations

1. Emphasizing quality

   The emphasis in rating is on quality and intensity of experience and training. A lengthy experience record of low quality may prove only that a competitor lacks ability to learn or progress. The quality of past performance is determined by careful analysis of the statements of the applicants and, if practicable, of persons who furnish corroborative information.

2. Evaluating different kinds of evidence

   In making judgments, the rater must consider all information he has obtained, weighing each piece of evidence according to its strength or weakness, and assigning a point value to the element which, in his judgment, best represents how well the applicant is qualified to perform the particular skill, knowledge or ability on the job. When evidences from different sources are not in agreement, the rater must evaluate the sources in terms of the relative strengths of each. For example, applicants who meet the job requirements by proven experience are rated eligible even though they fail the written test.

3. Crediting overall experience

   The relevant aspects of an individual's total experience and training are rated as to the extent to which they satisfy the requirements of the job element. Information for one element on the application form may indicate experience that is usable in other elements.

   Experience with equipment other than that used in the position to be filled should be considered insofar as it would help the applicant learn and perform the duties of the position. Applicants are rated according to their capacity or potential to perform regardless of how they came by this knowledge and skill. For example-

   An applicant for an automotive mechanic had experience as an automotive mechanic and as a maintenance electrician, but he had never done electrical troubleshooting on automobiles. In rating the application for a job requiring electrical troubleshooting on automotive equipment, the rater would take into account the extent to which the individual's skill as an electrical maintenance worker could be used on automotive equipment.

4. Relating experience and training to the job applied for

   A particular qualification requirement is not considered in the abstract, but is considered in its relationship to the job. For example, if applicants are experienced in some, but not all, areas of boiler maintenance, the point value they received in the element, Preventive Maintenance, should be in proportion to the extent to which their knowledge of boiler maintenance would permit them to operate in all the areas needed on the job.

   Raters should keep in mind that applicants may have understated or overstated their abilities and experience. For this reason, information on applicants from other sources should be considered, if available.

Back to Top

The Rating Process

1. Eliminating obvious ineligibles

   A review is first made of all available information to give the rater an overall picture of the applicant's qualifications.

   On the basis of this review, the qualifications are evaluated first against the prescribed screen out element. Those applicants who appear to possess at least the minimal acceptable qualification requirement (2-point value) described in the crediting plan are considered for further rating. Those who obviously do not meet the 2-point requirement are rated ineligible and are eliminated. For those who appear to be eligible, no final point value is assigned to the screen-out element at this time.

2. Rating potential eligibles

   The potential eligibles are then rated against each element. The first element is evaluated by comparing it with the point value descriptions and examples for that element contained in the crediting plan. The final selection of point value is made only after consideration of all other available information. For example-

   The applicants' statement for the element, Ability To Keep Records and Make Reports, indicates ability to set up and maintain card files, keep time and attendance records, and to make written reports.

   The experience statement matches the description and examples given in the crediting plan for the 3-point value. However, the information in one qualification questionnaire from a former supervisor stated that the applicant was weak in this respect. The other available information did not support the applicant's statement. The overall employment record did not show that this ability was important in jobs he or she had held.

   A judgment must then be made whether to rate the element 3 points as indicated by the applicant's statement, or rate 2 points because other information indicates that he or she is barely acceptable in this element.

   Point values are applied to the remaining elements in the same manner. The screen-out element is assigned a point value last since this order of rating elements permits the rater to gain an overall picture of the applicant's qualifications and to relate the worth of all elements to the screen-out element. Applicants must receive 2 points on the screen-out element to be rated eligible.

   An applicant may be weak in several elements and still be eligible, but only if the weaknesses are compensated for by strengths in other elements. In order to demonstrate that strengths compensate for weaknesses, an applicant must, in addition to meeting the screen-out, have an average of two credits on all the elements. The total raw score must be at least equal to one-half the total number of points possible. If six elements (including the screen-out element) are used, the applicant must earn at least 12 points in order to be eligible.

3. Reconciling scores of raters

   It may be desirable to use two or more raters, particularly for the more complex jobs. In that instance, consideration must be given to differences in ratings which might occur.

   If the raters' total raw scores vary by more than 2 points, they should discuss the matter and reach agreement on a final rating.

   If the raters vary by only 1 or 2 points, the total raw scores may be averaged to arrive at a final rating.

   If a difference occurs in the rating of the screen-out element, or if the difference results in a rating of eligible by one rater and ineligible by another, the raters resolve the matter through discussion.

4. Converting raw scores

   The total raw score is converted to a rating of from 70 to 100 by using the following conversion table:

   Conversion Table

   If total raw score is -	Converted rating is indicated below when the number of elements is -
   	10	9	8	7	6	5	4
   40	100
   39	99
   38	97
   37	96
   36	94	100
   35	39	98
   34	91	97
   33	90	95
   32	88	93	100
   31	87	92	98
   30	85	90	96
   29	84	88	94
   28	82	87	93	100
   27	81	85	91	98
   26	79	83	89	96
   25	78	82	87	94
   24	76	80	85	91	100
   23	75	78	83	89	98
   22	73	77	81	87	95
   21	72	75	79	85	93
   20	70	73	78	83	90	100
   19		72	76	81	88	97
   18		70	74	79	85	94
   17			72	76	83	91
   16			70	74	80	88	100
   15				72	78	85	96
   14				70	75	82	93
   13					73	79	89
   12					70	76	85
   11						73	81
   10						70	78
   9							74
   8							70

Back to Top

Applicants must be physically able to perform efficiently the duties of the position. The basis on which agencies may establish specific medical standards or physical requirements is discussed in 5 CFR 339.

In general, there must be a direct relationship between the medical standard or physical requirement and the actual duties of the position. A physical condition or impairment may be disqualifying for employment only if there is a direct relationship between the condition and the nature of the duties of the specific position to be filled. Failure to meet an established medical standard or physical requirement means that the individual is not qualified for the position unless there is sufficient evidence that he or she can perform the duties of the position safely and efficiently despite a condition that would normally be disqualifying. A physical impairment will not disqualify an applicant for appointment if the condition is compensated for by a satisfactory prosthesis, medical or mechanical aid, or by reasonable accommodation.

Agencies are required to make reasonable accommodation for the physical or mental limitations of an individual who is a qualified job applicant or employee with a disability, unless the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the agency. Agencies should consult guidance on reasonable accommodation issued by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.