Polyman2002 wrote on Oct 30^th, 2002 at 3:36am:


Polyman, 
This site mainly exists because of good people who failed the polygraph (sometimes multiple times) for no good reason. Judging by your screen name alone, you may be a recent polygraph trainee -- if so, you'll learn, when you get to the real world, that the polygraph doesn't always do what it should.   

However, there are some few of us here simply because we have a good sense of justice and recognize a fraud for what it is.  And, of course, some of us just like to argue

I, for one, have no interest in letting the polygraph's fraud endanger the national security upon which we all depend.  I also have no interest in seeing good people go to waste, not to mention the integrity of those people wrongly maligned.

Skeptic

The federal goverment (CIA excluded) uses the merit hiring system.  If you don't know what this is let me explain.  It's a point system that is used in an effort to promote equality. Right or wrong it's what the feds use.  Let me take you along the hiring process of the FBI since I know this one very well.

Step one is the pre-application:  the application is reviewed with a check list and score card.  No matter what you are like an equal scale is used on all appplicants.  The highest scores are then selected for the first test.

Test 1:  it's a computer graded test sent to Washington and no one has any say to who passes or fails.  The computer has a set score and if you make it you pass.  If not, you fail.  

If you pass this step your are instructed to send a full application to the FBI.  This again is reviewed with a scoring card and the highest grades get an interview.  That's what the 10 point for veterens prefrence means.

At the interview you are asked 15 questions by 3 agents.   Everyone gets the same questions and the interviewers use score cards (there's a very good book explaining this score card called Law Enforcment Officer by Craig A. Zendzian, PhD).  The interview is also tape recorded and stored to help enforce the interviewers to stay fair.  If your score card meets a grade you pass this step.

Let me stop here for a second and tell you why this is so important.  In the government's effort for fairness everyone is treated as equal as possible so far.  What this means is if you totaly don't have the attitude the FBI wants they can't do anything to you.  Thier hands are tied so far. You can be a good test taker yet the Agents are looking at you saying "my god we don't want to hire this clown".  And don't give me some post about how you can't be a clown and make it this far because you can and it's done all the time in every job.


Now here's where things get interesting.  The poly is the next step.  This is done by an FBI agent and the power is in his or her hands.  No more equal rights.  No more score cards.  No more Office of Personel Managment checking your score cards and looking over your back.  This is the time to get rid of the dead weight without anyone stopping you.  

This is why so many people mysteriously fail the poly.  The agency they were applying for just didn't want them on the team and had to wait for the poly to give them the boot. 

That my friends is the real world.  Any managers reading this know the back door games used to get rid of people, and do it in a way to prevent law suits and ways to promote people you like.

I think the poly is a good tool for booting out rejects.  How many of you out there would want to run an orginization where uncle sam says you have no say in who you hire?

Again, I know this isn't fair but it's reality.

Hi George,

I respect your efforts to remove unfairness.  I really do.  I too believe in justice for all.  However, it’s a goal you will never obtain because there’s no such thing as equality in any society.  You preach fairness in the hiring system yet fail to tell anyone how to make it fair.  The reason is you can't.  No matter what system you design there will be unfairness present.  Please tell me how you would change the poly test?

I recommend you read a book called "The Death Of Common Sense: How Law is Suffocating America"  I can't remember the author off the top of my head.

Let me give you one of many examples from the book.  A minority group (such as yours) realized non-whites were getting overlooked more often then whites when it came time for promotions throughout American companies.  After lobbying for equality and winning by getting laws changed companies were forced to keep a close eye on every employee’s progress out of fear of a law suit.  (Forgive me for my vagueness, the author gives specifics in the book and you would need to read it)  After law suits started pooping up (due to the new law) companies saw every non-whites applicant as a potential law suit so they stop hiring them.  Now non-whites were not getting hired as much and again they were back to lobbying for new hiring laws.  The new laws finally passed saying 15% of your company needs to be non-white.  Now more qualified applicants are dismissed in an effort to meet the 15% requirement.  So qualified whites are being treated unfairly.   

Here’s another example that happened a few months ago.  Recently my company laid off about 30% of the folks.  Each manager was told to provide a list of the 30% in their department that they are letting go.  I have a good relationship with my manager and he told me at lunch that Human Resources returned his list and told him he needs to add one white male around 30 to the list because they needed to make it more “racially equal”  to prevent a law suit.  He only has 3 people that fit into that category (me being one of them).  The three he has are all vital to the department because we all do a unique job that has no other person as a back up.  Is that fair to the three of us?  (by the way I didn’t cry about it I told him do what you have to because I understand how the system works and sometimes you just end up on the short end of the stick).

My father is career Air Force, and last week he commented how the hiring system is a joke because after the government looks at all the scores and ranks the folks for jobs… quote: “we (himself and the other managers) hire who we want”.   

If you can come to the realization that inequality is going to be around no matter what then you can focus on looking at what inequalities are least damaging and offer the most pros and least cons.  I feel all agencies need the power to make their own choices and no matter what laws people get passed those agency will still hire who they want (for the most part).  That is how I can support the poly test.  I know it’s not fair or perfect but NOTHING is.

I’m not racist in anyway.  I believe that each person in society needs to do their best no matter what life tosses them and to see people sit around and cry like “babies” about failing a test unfairly is disturbing.  George, you seem like a determined guy and maybe some day your group will win the fight against the poly.  Sadly if you do another group will spring up to protest it’s “unfair” replacement and your group will then be on the other side of the fence defending the “new” system just like the supporters of the poly are doing now against you.  There’s countless injustices in life and everyone has to pick what ones are worth fighting for.  In my opinion and experiences with injustice, the change of the polygraph is just not worth fighting for.  There’s bigger fish to fry.

Matt,

Although fairness does come into play as well as due process, right to confront witnesses against oneself and a variety of other constitutional and other issues that we are all rightly concerned about, polygraph screening could easily be eliminated on a very analytical basis--cost to benefit ratio.  The costs are enormous in terms of damage to the reputations of innocent examinees, danger to national security (no spies caught/several well-known spies having gotten past polygraph examinations), the government being denied the services of competent and talented individuals with the benefits largely imagined (other than full employment for the polygraph industry) and certainly not well documented and statistically demonstrated.  As I told Breeze regarding high level political decisions (Spencer Abraham and DOE) based on different considerations, even for considerably lower level managers and operational employees this decision is a no-brainer--get rid of polygraph screening!!