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 9 post(s).
Posted by: xenonman
Posted on: Nov 1st, 2016 at 6:12pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Quote:
This is a sad day.  Another federal agency has succumbed to using pseudo-science polygraphy.

Sad


Time was when the FBI also did not routinely use the polygraph for employment screening purposes. Sad
Posted by: xenonman
Posted on: Nov 1st, 2016 at 6:05pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
George W. Maschke wrote on Oct 17th, 2016 at 5:58pm:
Felix Bloch was never charged with, let alone convicted of, espionage. But if he were a spy, the odds that the polygraph would have caught him are approximately zero.


Ironically, he was later convicted in NC of the much more mundane crime of shoplifting!    Smiley
Posted by: xenonman
Posted on: Oct 29th, 2016 at 4:43pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
George W. Maschke wrote on Oct 17th, 2016 at 5:58pm:
Felix Bloch was never charged with, let alone convicted of, espionage. But if he were a spy, the odds that the polygraph would have caught him are approximately zero.


No, he was never even arrested because the investigation of him had deteriorated into a wild  "media circus". Wink
Posted by: George W. Maschke
Posted on: Oct 17th, 2016 at 5:58pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Felix Bloch was never charged with, let alone convicted of, espionage. But if he were a spy, the odds that the polygraph would have caught him are approximately zero.
Posted by: xenonman
Posted on: Oct 17th, 2016 at 5:17pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
They're afraid of more Felix Bloch incidents! Smiley
Posted by: Visitor
Posted on: Oct 16th, 2016 at 12:44am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Well this is a losing situation for the employee.  If the Department has the option to accept or reject the polygraph results no matter what the outcome, whether the employee passes or fails the Department does not mean anything if the Department is already out to end the career of the employee.
Posted by: Savannah Isis
Posted on: Oct 15th, 2016 at 3:28pm
  Mark & QuoteQuote
From 12 FAM 251.4-3(D)  Exculpation

a. A polygraph examination may be authorized for the purpose of exculpation.  The request for such examination may be initiated by an applicant, intern, employee, or contractor of a U.S. Government agency, who is the subject of a criminal, personnel security, or counterintelligence investigation.  A DSS special agent or Department OIG investigator may also advise the prospective examinee that he or she has the option of undergoing an exculpatory polygraph examination, but may not obligate the Department to abide by the results of the examination.

+++

So the examinee may undergo an exculpatory examination, but the agency is not obligated to abide by the results.

Yet polygraph is supposed to "work". Smiley

This is an admission it doesn't.
Posted by: xenonman
Posted on: Oct 1st, 2016 at 5:59am
  Mark & QuoteQuote
Quote:
We used to be able to say that the U.S. Department of State (DOS) was one agency that did not use polygraphs, however as of September 1, 2016, this is no longer the case.


Does this mean that everyone in INR will now have to be polygraphed?  How about the Diplomatic Security Service?   Undecided
Posted by: Visitor
Posted on: Sep 30th, 2016 at 9:42pm
  Mark & Quote
We used to be able to say that the U.S. Department of State (DOS) was one agency that did not use polygraphs, however as of September 1, 2016, this is no longer the case.

See the DOS policies here:

https://fam.state.gov/fam/12fam/12fam0250.html

The date in brown at the top of the page and under each section shows the date the policy was initiated.  The black standard font means the policy is official, the purple italic font means some final approver has to click a button to make the policy official, but that is more of a formality because the policy has been finalized and already implemented.

If you read through it, the polygraph is NOT used for pre-employment screening...yet.  However, the polygraph can be used  if you are under criminal investigation, if the department believes you have counterintelligence issues, if you are working with the Intelligence Community, or if you need to be part of some super-secret Special Access Program.  Before this policy was created, employees could get TS clearance with SCI and SAP access without a polygraph.  Now it looks like SCI and SAP may require the polygraph.

The policy also describes the polygraph is detail about the pre-test, post-test, irrelevant questions, and the like.

This is a sad day.  Another federal agency has succumbed to using pseudo-science polygraphy.

Sad
 
  Top