Stephano
Oh of course.  Remember I was formerly employed by LEO.  I had a chance to attend a social function with a good number of former coworkers who were interesting in my current goings on.  I had some interesting conversations. No one really thinks its fair, and most had similar stories from their applicant days regarding polygraphs and the psychological screenings. Most people applied several places before landing somewhere.
The general opinion is that its extremely fallible but very useful in investigations where they need psychological pressure.  They think its bogus, but like the value of it when they have a fish in the boat so to speak.
One good friend uses it in criminal investigations once in a while, and from the conversation we had, probably read this site.  He said something to the effect of;
 
Whenever I send someone to take it, I already know they are guilty, so its not exactly news to me when they fail.  Even if they pass, it tells me they are a sociopath without a conscience and I'll need to change up my interview technique. Otherwise, its just baloney, biased against the innocent, and probably just a way for HR to strike applicants since agency staffing issues don't seem to mesh well with municipal budgets.  We want 60 guys, we can only pay for 30 guys.  Half the applicants get struck because we need a way to strike them that will not overtly indicate bias and get us sued.

He used a hypothetical argument of, if he sent one guy to one with a good idea he will fail, he can also predict the results accurately 98% of the time.  If he sends 100 random people to weed out potential sex offenders or something, he is going to waste a lot of time.   

He then spent 20 minutes instructing me on countermeasures he was aware of, all the way from sphincter puckering to anti anxiety medication.   

To me it sounded like he knew it was a sham as far as pre employment screening.  Note all the LEO's in the news getting busted left and right for everything from drug offenses to fraud.  How did they slip through?

On a side not, a lawyer friend discussed another angle with me.  He said I could consider legal options against the second examiner, because his pre exam questions regarding the other exam and examiner constituted breach.  He said I was at that moment trapped in a no win situation of either being uncooperative with his questioning, or providing him with the actual identity of another examiner he could potentially discredit, lessening his chances of scoring it fairly.  What do you think?

I note that today is the 20th anniversary of my FBI pre-employment examination, which, among other things, ultimately led to the creation of AntiPolygraph.org and my being here in Oklahoma City this week to observe Doug Williams' trial.