- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by suethem
- May 22, 2003, 07:32 PMGarhun01,
What happened to you is not uncommon from what I have heard. You can read my previous post "fail here, pass there" under share your polygraph/CVSA experience.
You now have a first hand losing experience with the 'roulette machine'. You won twice, you lost once.
My friend who failed two polygraphs, from two different agencies, applied with another agency, passed his poly and got hired. Same questions, same answers, different results.
Interesting!
According to two polygraphers your an outstanding citizen.
According to a third polygrapher your a drug taking, family abusing, sex pervert!
You would think that their results were the same, unless....
What happened to you is not uncommon from what I have heard. You can read my previous post "fail here, pass there" under share your polygraph/CVSA experience.
You now have a first hand losing experience with the 'roulette machine'. You won twice, you lost once.
My friend who failed two polygraphs, from two different agencies, applied with another agency, passed his poly and got hired. Same questions, same answers, different results.
Interesting!
According to two polygraphers your an outstanding citizen.
According to a third polygrapher your a drug taking, family abusing, sex pervert!
You would think that their results were the same, unless....
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 22, 2003, 05:53 PMgarhun01,
29 CFR 801.4 is a federal regulation on application of the Employee Polygraph Protection Act (29 USC 22). Regrettably, that law gives federal, state, and local governments a blanket exemption from its provisions. So the law does not apply to local police departments that disqualify applicants on the basis of such quackery as polygraphy and CVSA.
We are seeking passage of a Comprehensive Employee Polygraph Protection Act that would eliminate all the exemptions to 29 USC 22. I hope you'll consider working with us to find congressional sponsors for, and secure eventual passage of, this much needed legislation.
29 CFR 801.4 is a federal regulation on application of the Employee Polygraph Protection Act (29 USC 22). Regrettably, that law gives federal, state, and local governments a blanket exemption from its provisions. So the law does not apply to local police departments that disqualify applicants on the basis of such quackery as polygraphy and CVSA.
We are seeking passage of a Comprehensive Employee Polygraph Protection Act that would eliminate all the exemptions to 29 USC 22. I hope you'll consider working with us to find congressional sponsors for, and secure eventual passage of, this much needed legislation.
Posted by suethem
- May 22, 2003, 04:08 PMWelcome to the club-
If I were you I would educate yourself about the departments hiring policy. Can you get a retest? If you can -definitely file an appeal. Also look into CVSA testing- Some polygraph services also do CVSA and laud it as a cheaper but just as accurate test. Other Polygraph sites say its worthless. You would think that the lie detector industry would get their story straight (agree one way or another) but the haven't.
You probably don't fit their hiring profile somehow.
I was just as upset about the false offenses that I was accused of. It reminded me of "The Trial" by Kavka. I knew that I had never done the things they accused me of and just siting there listening to the bullshit made me want to laugh, cry and strangle the interviewer.
Anytime that a Department says that it cant base the hiring on the test alone - is code for saying- they got sued. Explore why they cant base it on the CVSA alone. Fight it!!! Don't let the bullshit artists drag you down!!! Good luck!!
If I were you I would educate yourself about the departments hiring policy. Can you get a retest? If you can -definitely file an appeal. Also look into CVSA testing- Some polygraph services also do CVSA and laud it as a cheaper but just as accurate test. Other Polygraph sites say its worthless. You would think that the lie detector industry would get their story straight (agree one way or another) but the haven't.
You probably don't fit their hiring profile somehow.
I was just as upset about the false offenses that I was accused of. It reminded me of "The Trial" by Kavka. I knew that I had never done the things they accused me of and just siting there listening to the bullshit made me want to laugh, cry and strangle the interviewer.
Anytime that a Department says that it cant base the hiring on the test alone - is code for saying- they got sued. Explore why they cant base it on the CVSA alone. Fight it!!! Don't let the bullshit artists drag you down!!! Good luck!!
Posted by garhun01
- May 21, 2003, 03:19 PM Last week I underwent a CVSA exam for pre-employment at a local police department. I am
currently in the application process with two other departments and also am a reserve officer on
another department. With these other departments, I completed a polygraph examination and
had no issues. With this latest department, I specifically asked the detective (before the CVSA exam) if there was anything on my application that would disqualify me from employment with their agency. He stated that none of the information I had given him was significant enough to disqualify me.
During the CVSA, I was recorded as 'deceptive' on 5 out of 13 questions.
According to this examination, I have done illegal drugs in the past three years, I have abused a family member or past relation to the point of physical injury, I have accepted bribes, I intentionally falsified my application and I have made sexual propositions to inmates or arrestee's.
Clearly, I am very upset by these allegations and strongly expressed those feelings to the examiner. He then stated the department could not base a decision upon those results alone.
Five days after the examination I was notified that my interview had been cancelled based upon
the results of the CVSA exam.
My question is, according to section 801.4 (Prohibitions on lie detector use)of TITLE 29:
- Covered employers are prohibited from denying employment or promotion on the basis of the results of a test.
Since this is a police department and they are exempt from parts of this regulation, does this section apply to them? Is there any legal action I can take concerning this disqualification?
currently in the application process with two other departments and also am a reserve officer on
another department. With these other departments, I completed a polygraph examination and
had no issues. With this latest department, I specifically asked the detective (before the CVSA exam) if there was anything on my application that would disqualify me from employment with their agency. He stated that none of the information I had given him was significant enough to disqualify me.
During the CVSA, I was recorded as 'deceptive' on 5 out of 13 questions.
According to this examination, I have done illegal drugs in the past three years, I have abused a family member or past relation to the point of physical injury, I have accepted bribes, I intentionally falsified my application and I have made sexual propositions to inmates or arrestee's.
Clearly, I am very upset by these allegations and strongly expressed those feelings to the examiner. He then stated the department could not base a decision upon those results alone.
Five days after the examination I was notified that my interview had been cancelled based upon
the results of the CVSA exam.
My question is, according to section 801.4 (Prohibitions on lie detector use)of TITLE 29:
- Covered employers are prohibited from denying employment or promotion on the basis of the results of a test.
Since this is a police department and they are exempt from parts of this regulation, does this section apply to them? Is there any legal action I can take concerning this disqualification?