- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by chargetolie
- May 17, 2005, 07:43 PMThe EPPA Law regarding your inquiry. Key words are "reasonable suspicion, ongoing investigation and economic loss". Also the employer must furnish you with a written statement that specificaly details the reason for their "Reasonable Suspicion" that you were in some manner involved in their economic loss. Please consult the attorney in your area that handles labor cases. They will inform you what you should do.
(d) Limited exemption for ongoing investigations
Subject to sections 2007 and 2009 of this title, this chapter shall not prohibit an employer from requesting an employee to submit to a polygraph test if -
(1) the test is administered in connection with an ongoing
investigation involving economic loss or injury to the employer's
business, such as theft, embezzlement, misappropriation, or an
act of unlawful industrial espionage or sabotage;
(2) the employee had access to the property that is the subject
of the investigation;
(3) the employer has a reasonable suspicion that the employee
was involved in the incident or activity under investigation; and
(4) the employer executes a statement, provided to the examinee
before the test, that -
(A) sets forth with particularity the specific incident or
activity being investigated and the basis for testing
particular employees,
(B) is signed by a person (other than a polygraph examiner)
authorized to legally bind the employer,
(C) is retained by the employer for at least 3 years, and
(D) contains at a minimum -
(i) an identification of the specific economic loss or
injury to the business of the employer,
(ii) a statement indicating that the employee had access to
the property that is the subject of the investigation, and
(iii) a statement describing the basis of the employer's
reasonable suspicion that the employee was involved in the
incident or activity under investigation.
(d) Limited exemption for ongoing investigations
Subject to sections 2007 and 2009 of this title, this chapter shall not prohibit an employer from requesting an employee to submit to a polygraph test if -
(1) the test is administered in connection with an ongoing
investigation involving economic loss or injury to the employer's
business, such as theft, embezzlement, misappropriation, or an
act of unlawful industrial espionage or sabotage;
(2) the employee had access to the property that is the subject
of the investigation;
(3) the employer has a reasonable suspicion that the employee
was involved in the incident or activity under investigation; and
(4) the employer executes a statement, provided to the examinee
before the test, that -
(A) sets forth with particularity the specific incident or
activity being investigated and the basis for testing
particular employees,
(B) is signed by a person (other than a polygraph examiner)
authorized to legally bind the employer,
(C) is retained by the employer for at least 3 years, and
(D) contains at a minimum -
(i) an identification of the specific economic loss or
injury to the business of the employer,
(ii) a statement indicating that the employee had access to
the property that is the subject of the investigation, and
(iii) a statement describing the basis of the employer's
reasonable suspicion that the employee was involved in the
incident or activity under investigation.
Posted by googlybear
- May 17, 2005, 04:40 PMI got in touch with someone at our local labor office she told me they could not fire me for not taking the CVSA other than that she was not much help.
Posted by googlybear
- May 17, 2005, 04:36 PMi called one local office they did not know what EPPa was tol me to call federal office who in return told me to call local office a great system we have in these here United states.
Besides whatever happen to innocent UNTIL proven guilty. They have no idea what happen to the money that is why they have come up with this crappy joke of a test hoping they can catch someone being a little dishonest and pin it on them
Besides whatever happen to innocent UNTIL proven guilty. They have no idea what happen to the money that is why they have come up with this crappy joke of a test hoping they can catch someone being a little dishonest and pin it on them
Posted by George W. Maschke
- May 17, 2005, 03:55 AMQuote from: darkcobra2005 on May 16, 2005, 11:18 PMIf the police are requesting the CVSA or Polygraph, EPPA does not apply. It only applies to Employers.Even if it is the police who request the lie detector "test," the EPPA still prohibits the employer from taking any action against the employee for refusing to submit to the "test."
QuoteCVSA is not a polygraph and you should request polygraph if any test is going to be conducted by law enforcement and state your reason if you have one.Since neither voice stress analysis nor polygraphy have any scientific basis to begin with, there is no compelling reason to prefer one over the other. Anyone suspected of a crime would be wise to refuse to submit to such pseudoscientific nonsense.
QuoteLaw Enforcement generally does not require you to take a test, 5th amendment rights do apply. They simply request you take it. If they are using CVSA simply tell them no in a respectful manner.I agree, with the addition that it doesn't matter what kind of lie detector is used (CVSA or polygraph): anyone suspected of a crime would be wise to refuse. As used by police, the "test" is often little more than a pretext for interrogating a suspect in the absence of legal counsel.
Jeffery asked why one should refuse the lie detector in a "respectful manner." The reason is simple: when one is wrongly suspected of a crime, antagonizing the police is not likely to help to clear one's name. I think one can explain that one knows that lie detectors are junk science and still be polite.
Googlybear,
By telling you that the lie detector "test," was mandatory, your employer violated the Employee Polygraph Protection Act. Pillpopper is right; you need a lawyer.
Posted by Bill Crider
- May 17, 2005, 02:44 AMwhat you need is a lawyer, not this forum.
Posted by googlybear
- May 17, 2005, 01:00 AMNot sure no charges have been filed I know they filed a report or asked for advice the police will not conduct the cvsa it is a county office or something officer said all he could ask was would i consider it but that he could not make me take it I just don't understand alot of it and I don't believe these stupid machines are the answer
Posted by polyscam
- May 17, 2005, 12:48 AMDarkcobra makes a valid point:
This point is very true. Also, the point that you can simply refuse the test either way no matter who initiates the request. I have been advising based on the information you have written, which is the test is at the request of your employer. Any scientific study of CVSA refutes the claims of its manufacturers. I imagine (if I am incorrect please correct me) that the police involvement is at the request of your employer since they have the equipment to administer this farce. That is no matter, make them do the investigative work necessary to determine who stole the money.
Do you know if your employer has filed a criminal complaint? Or, has everything remained "in-house?"
QuoteIf the police are requesting the CVSA or Polygraph, EPPA does not apply. It only applies to Employers.
This point is very true. Also, the point that you can simply refuse the test either way no matter who initiates the request. I have been advising based on the information you have written, which is the test is at the request of your employer. Any scientific study of CVSA refutes the claims of its manufacturers. I imagine (if I am incorrect please correct me) that the police involvement is at the request of your employer since they have the equipment to administer this farce. That is no matter, make them do the investigative work necessary to determine who stole the money.
Do you know if your employer has filed a criminal complaint? Or, has everything remained "in-house?"
Posted by Jeffery
- May 17, 2005, 12:14 AMQuote from: darkcobra2005 on May 16, 2005, 11:18 PMIf they are using CVSA simply tell them no in a respectful manner.
Why respectful?
Posted by googlybear
- May 16, 2005, 11:25 PMThe police just now questioned me today he said he could ask but not insist and that it would clear my name. whatever. My employer says it was not the police who want it but my employer I was asked by my employer what I has said to the investigator and what he had said to me. Thats when I was told it was mandatory
Posted by googlybear
- May 16, 2005, 10:46 PMYes I did and thank you for that hook up.It's just that they have us all goin crazy and pointing fingers. I don't believe these test can tell if a person is lying that is something only God knows. This company has had me hide deposits when another manager left them out has had me make the safe short on purpose when the other manager did not sign off on the safe when she left for the day. My opion was since there was 3 of us in charge of the safe that day it should be paid back by the 3 of us. But... they won't listen they say the makes them believe your admiting to guilt. that is not the case I am admitting to not taking the deposit to the bank first thing in the morning and leaving it in the store for some one else to take.
Posted by polyscam
- May 16, 2005, 10:26 PMQuoteI could refuse and that would point a finger at me. then my boss goes on to tell me I HAVE to take it because money is missing so law requires that I take it. And that there is nothin I can do take it or be sent to jail.
You are correct in that the police will probably point a bigger finger at you. However, that will cause them to thoroughly investigate which should exonerate you. Let them do it. You may ask your boss if he has an extra 10 grand lying around that he wants to pay in fines. The law states that because the money is missing your employer can request that you submit to a dectection deception test (CVSA, polygraph), however it does not state that you must do so. If you are forced you will also be entitled to initiate litigation which you would surely win. Refusal does not mean jail time. They have no evidence, otherwise they wouldn't be making such a ridiculous request.
Did you have a chance to print the above references article and EPPA. You may want to do so if you have not.
Posted by googlybear
- May 16, 2005, 10:04 PMok ya'll help me today the investigator came from our local police dept.came got my statement said he could ask me to take the cvsa.That I could refuse and that would point a finger at me. then my boss goes on to tell me I HAVE to take it because money is missing so law requires that I take it. And that there is nothin I can do take it or be sent to jail. I am so stressed I did not take the money I hate this job and am so ready to quit I am just worried about the legal issues if I do not take this damn thing. HELP PLEASE
Posted by Bill Crider
- May 16, 2005, 01:34 AMI would find a way to document what gets said. have some evidence if they try to take action against you if you refuse their assinine test.
Posted by googlybear
- May 15, 2005, 12:19 PMThanks to all I am a single mother raising my children I do not need my reputation ruined by this crappy test.I have never been in a situation like this before and I appreciate everyones input so off I will go to work today to tell them that I am not taking this joke of a test. If push comes to shove they can have my keys and I will find employment else where
Posted by polyscam
- May 15, 2005, 06:04 AMQuoteActually, it would be inappropriate to use profanity in refusing to submit to a lie detector "test" proferred by one's employer. While no adverse action may be taken for refusing the "test," using such disrespectful language could be considered independent grounds for such action. In this situation, it's important to be polite if one wants to keep one's job.
That was more of a tongue-in-cheek suggestion. I would never seriously advise someone to reply in such a manner. Although, by simply requesting such an arbitrary exercise in futility the employer is deserving of such a response.
