Okay, so I work for a state agency in AZ that falls under the 'exempt' tier of the EPPA. Recently someone pirated a movie online using my employer's internet. Right now my employer is  in investigation-mode trying to find the guilty party(5 of us were working that day.) If no one fesses up, I have no doubt that they will try to administer polygraph tests for all 5 of us. 

That said, can I still legally refuse to take the test even though my employer is 'exempt' from the EPPA? If so, can I be terminated by my employer solely for refusing?

Any help is VERY much appreciated!

Galan007 wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 4:50am:


You can legally refuse to take the polygraph, however, your refusal may (and likely will) have adverse employment consequences, up to and including termination.

I didn't find much Arizona legislation governing the polygraph interrogation of state employees. There are, however, provisions governing the polygraphing of law enforcement officers:

http://azleg.state.az.us/ars/38/01104.htm

and probation officers:

http://azleg.state.az.us/ars/38/01134.htm

Note the requirement that any polygraph examination be audio recorded, and a copy provided to the examinee. Should it come to that, I would be happy to review the recording for you and provide you with a critique.

I disagree with Arkhangelsk's statement that "A competent examiner would refuse to polygraph anyone who is being coerced." First, it should be noted that there is no such thing as a "competent" polygraph examiner. They are all incompetent when it comes to the detection of deception. Moreover, any polygraph operator(s) interrogating you and/or your colleagues will no doubt be state employees who will do as instructed.

If I were in your shoes I would seek the advice of a local attorney with expertise in labor law and also consult a union representative, if you have one.

Galan007 wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 2:49pm:


I don't know the answers to your first question, but with respect to the second, see the Arizona Revised Statutes, Section 38-1138:

Quote:


See also Section 38-1108, which adopts similar language with respect to law enforcement officers.

Again, I suggest you seek local legal counsel. In addition, I suggest you review Chapters 1,3, and 4 of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. This information will be useful in the event that you are compelled to submit to this pseudoscientific procedure.

Ex Member wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 7:20pm:


What are these ethics of the polygraph "profession" of which you speak?

These are noble thoughts, but the polygraph "profession" is bound by no ethical code that enshrines them. The American Polygraph Association code you reference makes no such imposition. And in any event, the APA's "ethics" code is little more than window dressing.

Ex Member wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 8:35pm:


Polygraph operators have an easy out. The examinee will be coerced into signing a statement that she is submitting to the procedure "voluntarily." Is this news to anyone?

George W. Maschke wrote on May 7^th, 2016 at 3:34pm:
Thank you.

So in my case, it might be best to take the 'test'. If I refuse to take it, I can be subject to disciplinary action... But if I take, and fail, the test secondary to nervousness or whathaveyou, they can't issue any sort of discipline anyway.

Ex Member wrote on Jul 1^st, 2016 at 5:06am:


I'm not so sure about that. There were no doubt things going on in the polygraph "profession" fifty years ago that concerned Yeschke enough that he felt the need to write this article, which was published years after John A. Larson stated: "The lie detector, in many places, is nothing more than a psychological third-degree aimed at extorting a confession as the old physical beatings were."

It's also worth noting that Yeschke taught at the Reid school, whose teachings on interrogation are all about extorting confessions.