- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Fair Chance
- Sep 05, 2005, 01:07 AMDear Johnn,
You have obviously been exposed to the "flawless" polygraph procedure as practiced by the FBI. There are no words of consolation that I may give you to lessen the sting upon your honor by having such a hapless machine decide your future without any appeal or recourse. Infuriating as it is, appeal, appeal, and follow up constantly, your reputation is at stake.
Regards.
You have obviously been exposed to the "flawless" polygraph procedure as practiced by the FBI. There are no words of consolation that I may give you to lessen the sting upon your honor by having such a hapless machine decide your future without any appeal or recourse. Infuriating as it is, appeal, appeal, and follow up constantly, your reputation is at stake.
Regards.
Posted by Johnn
- Sep 03, 2005, 01:28 AMQuote from: Fair Chance on May 28, 2005, 01:39 AMDear Drew,
Pity the poor applicant who might want to inform himself about the polygraph before testing, he/she must be a radical afraid of failing for some unknown reason instead of an independant go getter who likes to research topics so he/she is better prepared to get a job. The same type of person so desperately needed to solve the problems faced by the FBI.
Regards.
And pity the poor (and naiive) applicant who does not prepare himself because he's being honest. Being honest is definitely not the way to pass a polygraph.
Catch 22 regarding the poly.
The smart way is to prepare for the test, and prepare well.
Posted by Johnn
- Sep 03, 2005, 01:23 AMQuote from: Drew Richardson on May 27, 2005, 10:06 PMFair Chance,
To the extent you have influence and opportunity, you might advise the appropriate Bureau personnel that their drug usage guidelines/levels for applicants are not the source of their hiring or employee suitability problems, but the "tool" they are using to assess compliance with those guidelines and which has no diagnostic validity for said purposes. It makes llittle difference whether they choose to employ a zero tolerance policy for some particular drug usage or one having an absurdly high level of acceptable drug usage. Polygraph screening will not allow them to determine whether a candidate is suitable in that regard (drug usage) with either extreme of acceptability or with any arbitrarily chosen level lying between the two extremes.
Exactly the point.
Posted by dimas
- Aug 18, 2005, 06:43 PMThe reality of it is that unless something comes out that actually has better results than the current Poly and CVSA, then they will change to that, but for the time being I see more departments going to the poly route than not.
Posted by cavhan7
- Aug 13, 2005, 05:49 PMI believe that no department or agency will ever confront the issue of polygraph head on. I also believe that this maybe a small step towards confronting the polygraph issue. They cant just come out of nowhere and say plolygraph isnt working. If they were to change the drug policy, what would they specifically change it to? Please update if you have any info.
Posted by Drew Richardson
- May 28, 2005, 01:21 PMFair Chance,
Your analysis is right on target. That which is now necessary is to keep the pressure on the bureaucratic louts so that the root cause of the problem (polygraph screening) is never far removed from any discussion of problems with applicant evaluation and selection.
Your analysis is right on target. That which is now necessary is to keep the pressure on the bureaucratic louts so that the root cause of the problem (polygraph screening) is never far removed from any discussion of problems with applicant evaluation and selection.
Posted by Fair Chance
- May 28, 2005, 01:39 AMDear Drew,
The Agency just does not want to confront the polygraph issue straight on so it is now trying to work around the edges.
They will try to blame just about everything else before they admit that the Emporer has to wear clothes when the windchill is causing frostbite. The first fingers are now being amputated but they refuse to believe that the lack of clothes is the root of the problem.
My posting was more to say that the symptoms are becoming hard to explain without admitting the root cause. While the polygraph is not immediately being blamed, it is certainly not helping.
The lack of "acceptable candidates" is starting to affect the FBI. The cost of processing is becoming prohibitive and record amount of support positions are being left unfilled. Congress is rabid about the lack of progress of Analyst hiring and many analyst are leaving after two or three years of service due to lack of respect for their jobs and menial job assignments. Without major changes, the FBI will collapse within ten years due to their inability to use technology (by not getting and keeping the best scientist of all fields). The 171 million dollar Trilogy project was just pronounced as a major flop. They can not keep a continuity of leadership in the technology fields because they value agents far more than scientific ability. They have a problem with technology and they insult the people who are capable of solving these massive problems by using a "polygraph" machine to determine if they are suitable for FBI service. The FBI is getting what they want, ignorant, unquestioning, robotic employees who are punished for independant thought. Pity the poor applicant who might want to inform himself about the polygraph before testing, he/she must be a radical afraid of failing for some unknown reason instead of an independant go getter who likes to research topics so he/she is better prepared to get a job. The same type of person so desperately needed to solve the problems faced by the FBI.
I have presented my opinion that no top notch scientific mind is going to give credence to the polygraph as a truth finding tool. I will respect the investigator or officer who believes in such tool but I repeat that the best minds will shy away from any organization that blindly thinks that the polygraph should be treated as a highly respected scientific instrument.
There are large amounts of employees who are retiring or preparing for retirement. Most of whom have never taken a polygraph. Their repacements must all go through a polygraph. The application process is starting to get mired to the point that many applicants take jobs elsewhere. The FBI is just flat out taking too long to offer them an actual position.
The answers are easy to see from the bottom, it is the top managment that refuses to admit it. Support personal are still treated like second class citizens. Think of it, they are called "support". They are not "good enough" to make it as an agent so they are called "support". Rather insulting if you ask me. This attitude helps explain why there is no shortage of agent applicants but many support job openings go unfilled for many months if not years. If the economy starts to pick up, the situation goes from bad to extremely bad.
Regards.
The Agency just does not want to confront the polygraph issue straight on so it is now trying to work around the edges.
They will try to blame just about everything else before they admit that the Emporer has to wear clothes when the windchill is causing frostbite. The first fingers are now being amputated but they refuse to believe that the lack of clothes is the root of the problem.
My posting was more to say that the symptoms are becoming hard to explain without admitting the root cause. While the polygraph is not immediately being blamed, it is certainly not helping.
The lack of "acceptable candidates" is starting to affect the FBI. The cost of processing is becoming prohibitive and record amount of support positions are being left unfilled. Congress is rabid about the lack of progress of Analyst hiring and many analyst are leaving after two or three years of service due to lack of respect for their jobs and menial job assignments. Without major changes, the FBI will collapse within ten years due to their inability to use technology (by not getting and keeping the best scientist of all fields). The 171 million dollar Trilogy project was just pronounced as a major flop. They can not keep a continuity of leadership in the technology fields because they value agents far more than scientific ability. They have a problem with technology and they insult the people who are capable of solving these massive problems by using a "polygraph" machine to determine if they are suitable for FBI service. The FBI is getting what they want, ignorant, unquestioning, robotic employees who are punished for independant thought. Pity the poor applicant who might want to inform himself about the polygraph before testing, he/she must be a radical afraid of failing for some unknown reason instead of an independant go getter who likes to research topics so he/she is better prepared to get a job. The same type of person so desperately needed to solve the problems faced by the FBI.
I have presented my opinion that no top notch scientific mind is going to give credence to the polygraph as a truth finding tool. I will respect the investigator or officer who believes in such tool but I repeat that the best minds will shy away from any organization that blindly thinks that the polygraph should be treated as a highly respected scientific instrument.
There are large amounts of employees who are retiring or preparing for retirement. Most of whom have never taken a polygraph. Their repacements must all go through a polygraph. The application process is starting to get mired to the point that many applicants take jobs elsewhere. The FBI is just flat out taking too long to offer them an actual position.
The answers are easy to see from the bottom, it is the top managment that refuses to admit it. Support personal are still treated like second class citizens. Think of it, they are called "support". They are not "good enough" to make it as an agent so they are called "support". Rather insulting if you ask me. This attitude helps explain why there is no shortage of agent applicants but many support job openings go unfilled for many months if not years. If the economy starts to pick up, the situation goes from bad to extremely bad.
Regards.
Posted by Drew Richardson
- May 27, 2005, 10:06 PMFair Chance,
To the extent you have influence and opportunity, you might advise the appropriate Bureau personnel that their drug usage guidelines/levels for applicants are not the source of their hiring or employee suitability problems, but the "tool" they are using to assess compliance with those guidelines and which has no diagnostic validity for said purposes. It makes llittle difference whether they choose to employ a zero tolerance policy for some particular drug usage or one having an absurdly high level of acceptable drug usage. Polygraph screening will not allow them to determine whether a candidate is suitable in that regard (drug usage) with either extreme of acceptability or with any arbitrarily chosen level lying between the two extremes.
To the extent you have influence and opportunity, you might advise the appropriate Bureau personnel that their drug usage guidelines/levels for applicants are not the source of their hiring or employee suitability problems, but the "tool" they are using to assess compliance with those guidelines and which has no diagnostic validity for said purposes. It makes llittle difference whether they choose to employ a zero tolerance policy for some particular drug usage or one having an absurdly high level of acceptable drug usage. Polygraph screening will not allow them to determine whether a candidate is suitable in that regard (drug usage) with either extreme of acceptability or with any arbitrarily chosen level lying between the two extremes.
Posted by Fair Chance
- May 27, 2005, 08:56 PMReaders,
The failure rate of applicants in the total "applications process" (which does not specify the polygraph) is under consideration for change.
The FBI is considering modification of when (last year or fourteen years ago) the usage and quantitative usage of illegal drugs.
This is the same process that changed the original question of "have you used any illegal drugs" in the past to the qualified questions of the present.
Lots of applicants, few qualifiers, the laws of supply and demand still apply. It seems that they can't afford to keep the system going the same way it is.
Maybe just a little hope that something is moving.
Regards.
The failure rate of applicants in the total "applications process" (which does not specify the polygraph) is under consideration for change.
The FBI is considering modification of when (last year or fourteen years ago) the usage and quantitative usage of illegal drugs.
This is the same process that changed the original question of "have you used any illegal drugs" in the past to the qualified questions of the present.
Lots of applicants, few qualifiers, the laws of supply and demand still apply. It seems that they can't afford to keep the system going the same way it is.
Maybe just a little hope that something is moving.
Regards.