(UTC)
Add Poll
 
Options: Text Color Split Pie
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
days and minutes. Leave it blank if you don't want to set it now.

Please type the characters that appear in the image. The characters must be typed in the same order, and they are case-sensitive.
Open Preview Preview

You can resize the textbox by dragging the right or bottom border.
Insert Hyperlink Insert FTP Link Insert Image Insert E-mail Insert Media Insert Table Insert Table Row Insert Table Column Insert Horizontal Rule Insert Teletype Insert Code Insert Quote Edited Superscript Subscript Insert List /me - my name Insert Marquee Insert Timestamp No Parse
Bold Italicized Underline Insert Strikethrough Highlight
                       
Change Text Color
Insert Preformatted Text Left Align Centered Right Align
resize_wb
resize_hb







Max 200000 characters. Remaining characters:
Text size: pt
More Smilies
View All Smilies
Collapse additional features Collapse/Expand additional features Smiley Wink Cheesy Grin Angry Sad Shocked Cool Huh Roll Eyes Tongue Embarrassed Lips Sealed Undecided Kiss Cry
Attachments More Attachments Allowed file types: txt doc docx ics psd pdf bmp jpe jpg jpeg gif png swf zip rar tar gz 7z odt ods mp3 mp4 wav avi mov 3gp html maff pgp gpg
Maximum Attachment size: 500000 KB
Attachment 1:
X
Topic Summary - Displaying 23 post(s).
Posted by: Lethe
Posted on: Feb 7th, 2009 at 6:29am 		  Mark & Quote
G Scalabr wrote on Dec 19th, 2008 at 6:02am:
Lethe wrote on Dec 18th, 2008 at 9:39pm:
R.I.P.?  I hope the worms make short work of him.  And hopefully someone pees on his grave.

And to think, I used to be a nice guy.  Really, I did.


Lethe,

Such posts are not appropriate on this forum. Hateful speech like the celebration of a person's death is in violation of AntiPolygraph.org's Posting Policy.

As much as I detest polygraphy, I do not feel that a vast majority of those who engage in it are evil people. 

As I have stated numerous times, I feel that most polygraph operators entered the field with good intentions. Many simply just lack enough understanding of science to realize the destructive value of what they are doing. Those who do understand often appear to settle into a "the ends justify the means" mentality.

Regardless of the [false] justification, polygraphy needs to be abolished.

Nonetheless, in working toward that goal, our strategy does not involve celebrating the death of any polygraph examiner. 

If you are going to continue to post on this forum, please do not make further classless, non-substantive posts like the one above.


Your characterization of my previous post is correct.  I apologize to the forum and to Mr. Savastano's family and friends.

Nothing in this post shall constitute evidence that I am a nice guy.
Posted by: T.M. Cullen
Posted on: Dec 30th, 2008 at 6:38pm 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
https://antipolygraph.org/cgi-bin/forums/YaBB.pl?num=1228976324

Maybe LE/GOV types are just more aware of this board.  Most have to take the polygraph, there is more word of mouth in those circles.

Give me a list of 100 EPPA polygraph examinees from a random sample and I'll interview them and see how many complain of being told they were deceptive when they weren't. 

TC
Posted by: pailryder
Posted on: Dec 30th, 2008 at 2:15pm 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Mr C

Thank you for your reply, but you seem to have missed my point.  I am not asking where are the complints about EPPA violations, those go to the DOL.  For  twenty years now, every private workplace must clearly display information informing all employees of their right to contact the Wage and Hour Division of the Dept of Labor to complain if their employer fails to follow the law. 

I am asking about complaints of FALSE POSITIVES from EPPA sanctioned tests.

We see new allegations of false positives resulting from law enforcement and government polygraph use on this board every day, or at least every week.  And yet, Mr Scalabrini cannot recall a single poster claiming they were falsely accused of theft following an EPPA test.  Can you?  Not one, not ever, in the history of this site?   

Posted by: T.M. Cullen
Posted on: Dec 29th, 2008 at 9:33pm 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Quote:
Where are the EPPA false positives complaints?


Are you saying that simply because there aren't many formal EPPA complaints that there must not be many actual violations?  That is absurd.

One might just as well ask where were all the sexual harassment complaints years ago when most complaints went UNreported despite laws against it.  

Once employees were given more facts about that issue, and steps taken to help eliminate the fear of reporting abuses, formal complaints DID rise. 

I posit you'd see the same phenomenon if people were given all the facts about the polygraph, and not just told edjamacate themselves about it in the "next 48 hours". 

TC
Posted by: pailryder
Posted on: Dec 29th, 2008 at 1:58pm 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Mr Cullen

48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays, seems like a fair balancing of the employees right to know and the employers need to resolve a matter of internal theft in a timely manner.

Where are the EPPA false positives complaints?
Posted by: T.M. Cullen
Posted on: Dec 24th, 2008 at 1:09am 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Quote:
Polygraph was restricted because in the late 70's early 80's we (private examiners) refused to clean our own house and police our own.  Abuses led to a public backlash and EPPA.


Also because of concern regarding THE RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY of the polygraph.  IOW, concern over whether the polygraph can and does actually do what it is pro ported to do.

Quote:
Today employees receive 48 hour written notice, not including weekends or holidays, so they can do research or seek whatever advice they desire.


Wow, a whole 48 HOURS!  To research the polygraph and get advice.  The average person could devour and comprehend the NAS report in that amount of time!   Roll Eyes  Get serious, that isn't enough time.

TC


Posted by: pailryder
Posted on: Dec 24th, 2008 at 12:50am 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
MR Cullen

Polygraph was restricted because in the late 70's early 80's we (private examiners) refused to clean our own house and police our own.  Abuses led to a public backlash and EPPA.

Today employees receive 48 hour written notice, not including weekends or holidays, so they can do research or seek whatever advice they desire.  No job related action can be taken based on their refusal.  They are informed of their right to consult with a repersentative before each phase.  At the test I am required to provide a copy of their rights and required to READ it to them and obtain their signature that I have done so. 

There are few complaints because employees are allowed to make well informed decesions and because with the addition of computer collection and scoring on single issue specific theft cases we get it right almost every time.  
Posted by: T.M. Cullen
Posted on: Dec 23rd, 2008 at 6:20pm 		  Mark & Quote
Quote:
How would you account for this site's lack of false positive complaints under EPPA?  Those employees receive 48 hour written notice, so we can assume they have time to search and become aware of this site and others.


People don't want to rock the boat.  Many have come to this board perplexed as to what to do.  They submit to peer pressure.  They don't want to be the only employee who "refuses to take the polygraph".  So then, if you fail despite telling the truth, on a polygraph you volunteered to take, under what grounds would you complain?

So here are you choices.  Refuse to take the test claiming your right under EPPA, and get accused of hiding something.  Or take the test voluntarily, submitting to peer pressure, and risk failing despite telling the truth.  Most don't become aware of the latter until after the fact, and are totally blown away that they told the truth yet failed.   

Are employees made aware of the fact that the polygraph has been found to be of limited reliabilty and of questionable validity by the scientific community?  Are they made aware of the risk of coming up "false positive".  It seems they should be made aware of this to make an intelligent decision whether to submit to it.  And not just be given some long government form to sign.  Their employer should go over all of the above with the employee.  They should specifically point out that the polygraph is of questionable reliability, and that they could possibly fail even if they tell the truth.

A better question would be how do you account for all the false positives?  Why had private sector polygraphs become restricted in the first place if they are 98% accurate as claimed by polygraph operators?  Do employers realize that polygraph operators routinely lie to examinees during the test, FALSELY claiming 98%?  They should be made aware of what they are subjecting their employees to.



TC
Posted by: pailryder
Posted on: Dec 23rd, 2008 at 4:28pm 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Mr Cullen

Perhaps, but most employees tell me they they are aware of the risk but choose to cooperate because the alternative is to continue working with a thief and a liar.

Posted by: pailryder
Posted on: Dec 23rd, 2008 at 4:18pm 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Mr Cullen

How would you account for this site's lack of false positive complaints under EPPA?  Those employees receive 48 hour written notice, so we can assume they have time to search and become aware of this site and others. 

Posted by: T.M. Cullen
Posted on: Dec 23rd, 2008 at 2:20am 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Quote:
They are good employees who understand their employers legitimate need to investigate and resolve an important situation, ie a workplace theft.  Even if they fail, no job related action can be taken against them without additional evidence.  I agree that is a good thing and I would not be opposed to extension of that protection to governmental use, if proper exemptions are provided.  


But they probably gullible like most of the public, and believe the polygraph is a valid and reliable test, and that all they have to do is just in there and "tell the truth" and all will be fine.  Most are unaware they can tell the truth and be labeled a liar, and have eyebrows raised against them.

Who wants to be employed someplace where they are "that guy/gal who failed the polygraph!".



TC
Posted by: pailryder
Posted on: Dec 22nd, 2008 at 2:46pm 		  Mark & Quote
Mr Scalabrini

Employees who submit to EPPA "tests" are not fools.  They are good employees who understand their employers legitimate need to investigate and resolve an important situation, ie a workplace theft.  Even if they fail, no job related action can be taken against them without additional evidence.  I agree that is a good thing and I would not be opposed to extension of that protection to governmental use, if proper exemptions are provided.   

I am unable to find anyone who tracks the number of EPPA tests.  I have personally conducted more than one thousand and I am one lone examiner.  The fact that your site sees so few complaints of false positive under EPPA is striking to me, and your explanation is not entirely satisfactory.   

Do you have something more recent than a preEPPA 60 Minutes segment from the 1980's?  That is more than twenty years old and well before the advent of computerized collection and scoring systems.

Thank you for the thoughtful and respectful exchange of ideas on this topic.
Posted by: G Scalabr
Posted on: Dec 22nd, 2008 at 8:03am 		  Mark & Quote
Quote:
Would you care to guess how many test are conducted in compliance with this law each year?


I'm not exactly sure, but I'm willing to bet that it's a small fraction of the number of "tests" that were being done annually prior to the enactment of this legislation. If you have these numbers, I would be interested in seeing them.

Quote:
How many posters to this site since 1988 have claimed to be false positive on an EPPA sanctioned test?
 
None, that I can remember--probably because so few of these "tests" are now occurring in the private sector. 

With regard to an apparently unsanctioned "test," we had a poster report polygraph abuse in the private sector less than two weeks ago.

Bottom line is that outside of government, the EPPA has reduced polygraphy to a nearly non-existent level compared to how it existed before this legislation was enacted.

Preemployment screening is now limited to just a handful of private industries (pharmaceutical, armored car, etc) that would be lucky to comprise one percent of total private sector jobs.

More importantly, "specific issue tests" are now VOLUNTARY. No action can be taken against an employee who refuses one.

Anyone who submits to such testing is a fool, as viewers of the 1986 60 Minutes segment described on page 21 ofThe Lie Behind the Lie Detector quickly became aware.


 
Posted by: pailryder
Posted on: Dec 22nd, 2008 at 4:21am 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Mr Cullen

The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 restricted private workplace polygraph, but did not end polygraph in the private workplace, even mandatory preemployment screening exams are allowed under certain conditions. 

Would you care to guess how many test are conducted in compliance with this law each year?  How about the number of complaints filed with the Dept. of Labor?  How many posters to this site since 1988 have claimed to be false positive on an EPPA sanctioned test?

In spite of EPPA, or maybe because of EPPA, twenty years have passed and private workplace polygraph testing in the US is alive and well. 

 Maybe its just me, but that doesn't fit my definition of abolished.

Posted by: T.M. Cullen
Posted on: Dec 21st, 2008 at 1:49am 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Like Gino said

Quote:
We are simply trying to close the loophole exemption for government entities in order to fully abolish it.


Would you agree that the polygraph has been abolished for non-government employees?

Of course, many still volunteer to take it when asked by police to "eliminate" themselves as "suspects", which is of course another charade. 

TC

Posted by: pailryder
Posted on: Dec 20th, 2008 at 7:26pm 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Mr Cullen

Generally restricted with exemptions is not the same as abolished.  I do these tests all the time.  They have not been abolished.

Nice try Mr Cullen, but next time read the entire law.  All branches of government are exempt from EPPA.  Depending on state law, a cook at a county run nursing facility (hardly requiring TS clearence) can still be forced to take the poly or face termination.  I am not saying this is right or good, just that is the law for now.
Posted by: T.M. Cullen
Posted on: Dec 20th, 2008 at 7:04pm 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Quote:
.....Polygraph was not abolished by congress.....


The following is from the DOL website:

Edited:
The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 (EPPA) generally prevents employers from using lie detector tests, either for pre-employment screening or during the course of employment, with certain exemptions.


Employees can not be required to take a polygraph, except LEO or certain government employees holding security clearances at certain levels (typically TS).

If I read it correctly, even if there is "reasonable suspicion" that an employee has stolen, taken drugs on the job...etc. he/she can not be forced by the employer to take a polygraph.  And no adverse action can be taken by the employer if the employee refuses to be subject to a polygraph interrogation.  This makes sense as no citizen suspected of a crime can be FORCED to take a polygraph.

TC
Posted by: pailryder
Posted on: Dec 20th, 2008 at 1:08pm 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Mr Scalabrini

You statement is incorrect, maybe wishful thinking on your part.  Polygraph was not abolished by congress.  I have conducted many tests since 1988 sanctioned by the labor law the 100th congress passed.  And that, sir, is a FACT. 
Posted by: G Scalabr
Posted on: Dec 19th, 2008 at 6:22pm 		  Mark & Quote
pailryder wrote on Dec 19th, 2008 at 11:25am:
Mr Scalabrini

I don't understand the destructive value of what I am doing and I don't understand why my chosen profession should be abolished.  Are we a misguided psuedoscience, like astrology, or are we a moral evil, like slavery?  


The destructive value to society of the existence of a "test" that purports to detect deception but in reality is no more than an interrogation in disguise should be abundantly clear.

It was certainly lucid to the 100th United States Congress, the members of which did indeed abolish polygraphy in the United States. We are simply trying to close the loophole exemption for government entities in order to fully abolish it.

With regard to the latter part of your question, yes, polygraphy is a pseudoscience just like astrology. And while not on the level of slavery, using a pseudoscientific process to render an opinion that someone is deceptive (thus damaging his/her reputation) is certainly a moral wrong. 

Posted by: pailryder
Posted on: Dec 19th, 2008 at 11:25am 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
Mr Scalabrini

I don't understand the destructive value of what I am doing and I don't understand why my chosen profession should be abolished.  Are we a misguided psuedoscience, like astrology, or are we a moral evil, like slavery?   

Best Holiday wishes to All.  I am praying for you Lethe.
Posted by: G Scalabr
Posted on: Dec 19th, 2008 at 6:02am 		  Mark & Quote
Lethe wrote on Dec 18th, 2008 at 9:39pm:
R.I.P.?  I hope the worms make short work of him.  And hopefully someone pees on his grave.

And to think, I used to be a nice guy.  Really, I did.


Lethe,

Such posts are not appropriate on this forum. Hateful speech like the celebration of a person's death is in violation of AntiPolygraph.org's Posting Policy.

As much as I detest polygraphy, I do not feel that a vast majority of those who engage in it are evil people. 

As I have stated numerous times, I feel that most polygraph operators entered the field with good intentions. Many simply just lack enough understanding of science to realize the destructive value of what they are doing. Those who do understand often appear to settle into a "the ends justify the means" mentality.

Regardless of the [false] justification, polygraphy needs to be abolished.

Nonetheless, in working toward that goal, our strategy does not involve celebrating the death of any polygraph examiner. 

If you are going to continue to post on this forum, please do not make further classless, non-substantive posts like the one above.
Posted by: Lethe
Posted on: Dec 18th, 2008 at 9:39pm 		  Mark & QuoteQuote
R.I.P.?  I hope the worms make short work of him.  And hopefully someone pees on his grave.

And to think, I used to be a nice guy.  Really, I did.
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Dec 5th, 2008 at 6:55am 		  Mark & Quote
Nick Savastono, who through his many television appearances became one of the best known polygraph operators in America, has died:

Quote:
http://www.instantriverside.com/riverside-ca-news/nicholas-savastano-corona-cali...

Nicholas Savastano of Corona, California died suddenly while on a business trip in India, November 22, 2008.

Nicholas was the son of the late Louis and Katherine (Campisi) Savastano. He was 63 years of age at the time of his death. Nicholas lived in California for the past 30 years. He was the President and CEO of a very successful private investigative service, The Amherst Group.

Nicholas was a Certified Polygraph Examiner, graduate of the National Academy of Lie Detection in 1982 and has conducted more than 4,000 polygraph examinations throughout the United States and Europe. He has performed a wide range of examinations for a variety of clients including multi-national companies, Fortune 500 corporations, entrepreneurs, and private individuals.

Nicholas achieved substantial notoriety in the entertainment industry as the selected polygraph examiner for several major television networks in the United States and throughout Europe and Asia. He appeared as himself in several network series, including the American and several international versions of “The Moment Of Truth”, “Meet My Folks”, “The Brady Bunch 25 Year Reunion”, “Who Wants To Marry My Dad”, “Temptation Island”, “Celebrity Fit Club”, “Nothing But The Truth” and “General Hospital”.

He also made many guest appearances on such shows as “The Jimmy Kimmel Show”, “The Tyra Banks Show”, “The Mike & Juliet Show” and numerous other television and radio talk shows. He also appears in an expert interview on the DVD of the Robert De Niro movie “Meet The Parents”. He was a member of the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA).

Nicholas is survived by three sons, Michael Savastano, of Marion, Ohio, William Savastano, of Concord, NH and Nicholas Brandon Savastano, of Riverside, CA; step-mother Mary (Kalil) Savastano of Derry, NH; two brothers, Richard Savastano, of Palm Bay, FL and Michael Savastano, of Salem, New Hampshire, and a sister, Kathleen (Savastano) Tearno, of Vienna, VA

Memorial contributions may be given to Future Scholar Advisor Plan for the benefit of Nicholas Brandon Savastano, c/o Kathleen A. Tearno, 8024 Kidwell Hill Court, Vienna, VA 22182.

Arrangements: Relatives and friends are respectfully invited to attend memorial visiting hours on Saturday, December 6, 2008 from 10:30 AM to 12:30 PM at the Cataudella Funeral Home, 126 Pleasant Valley Street, Methuen, MA 01844, 978-685-5379.

A memorial service will be held Saturday at 12:15 PM in the funeral home chapel. For directions and condolences, please visit our online website at www.cataudellafh.com.


Savastano did not respond to a 2003 public challenge to demonstrate his claimed ability to detect countermeasures by accepting Dr. Richardson's polygraph countermeasure challenge (which has now gone more than six years without a taker).
 
  Top  

AntiPolygraph.org Message Board » Powered by YaBB 2.6.12!
YaBB Forum Software © 2000-2024. All Rights Reserved.

Valid RSS Valid XHTML Valid CSS Powered by Perl Source Forge