- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Lethe
- Feb 07, 2009, 01:29 AMQuote from: 202E2928470 on Dec 19, 2008, 01:02 AMQuote from: 664F5E424F2A0 on Dec 18, 2008, 04:39 PMR.I.P.? I hope the worms make short work of him. And hopefully someone pees on his grave.
And to think, I used to be a nice guy. Really, I did.
Lethe,
Such posts are not appropriate on this forum. Hateful speech like the celebration of a person's death is in violation of AntiPolygraph.org's Posting Policy.
As much as I detest polygraphy, I do not feel that a vast majority of those who engage in it are evil people.
As I have stated numerous times, I feel that most polygraph operators entered the field with good intentions. Many simply just lack enough understanding of science to realize the destructive value of what they are doing. Those who do understand often appear to settle into a "the ends justify the means" mentality.
Regardless of the [false] justification, polygraphy needs to be abolished.
Nonetheless, in working toward that goal, our strategy does not involve celebrating the death of any polygraph examiner.
If you are going to continue to post on this forum, please do not make further classless, non-substantive posts like the one above.
Your characterization of my previous post is correct. I apologize to the forum and to Mr. Savastano's family and friends.
Nothing in this post shall constitute evidence that I am a nice guy.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Dec 30, 2008, 01:38 PMhttps://antipolygraph.org/forum/index.php?topic=4178.msg31920#msg31920
Maybe LE/GOV types are just more aware of this board. Most have to take the polygraph, there is more word of mouth in those circles.
Give me a list of 100 EPPA polygraph examinees from a random sample and I'll interview them and see how many complain of being told they were deceptive when they weren't.
TC
Maybe LE/GOV types are just more aware of this board. Most have to take the polygraph, there is more word of mouth in those circles.
Give me a list of 100 EPPA polygraph examinees from a random sample and I'll interview them and see how many complain of being told they were deceptive when they weren't.
TC
Posted by pailryder
- Dec 30, 2008, 09:15 AMMr C
Thank you for your reply, but you seem to have missed my point. I am not asking where are the complints about EPPA violations, those go to the DOL. For twenty years now, every private workplace must clearly display information informing all employees of their right to contact the Wage and Hour Division of the Dept of Labor to complain if their employer fails to follow the law.
I am asking about complaints of FALSE POSITIVES from EPPA sanctioned tests.
We see new allegations of false positives resulting from law enforcement and government polygraph use on this board every day, or at least every week. And yet, Mr Scalabrini cannot recall a single poster claiming they were falsely accused of theft following an EPPA test. Can you? Not one, not ever, in the history of this site?
Thank you for your reply, but you seem to have missed my point. I am not asking where are the complints about EPPA violations, those go to the DOL. For twenty years now, every private workplace must clearly display information informing all employees of their right to contact the Wage and Hour Division of the Dept of Labor to complain if their employer fails to follow the law.
I am asking about complaints of FALSE POSITIVES from EPPA sanctioned tests.
We see new allegations of false positives resulting from law enforcement and government polygraph use on this board every day, or at least every week. And yet, Mr Scalabrini cannot recall a single poster claiming they were falsely accused of theft following an EPPA test. Can you? Not one, not ever, in the history of this site?
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Dec 29, 2008, 04:33 PMQuoteWhere are the EPPA false positives complaints?
Are you saying that simply because there aren't many formal EPPA complaints that there must not be many actual violations? That is absurd.
One might just as well ask where were all the sexual harassment complaints years ago when most complaints went UNreported despite laws against it.
Once employees were given more facts about that issue, and steps taken to help eliminate the fear of reporting abuses, formal complaints DID rise.
I posit you'd see the same phenomenon if people were given all the facts about the polygraph, and not just told edjamacate themselves about it in the "next 48 hours".
TC
Posted by pailryder
- Dec 29, 2008, 08:58 AMMr Cullen
48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays, seems like a fair balancing of the employees right to know and the employers need to resolve a matter of internal theft in a timely manner.
Where are the EPPA false positives complaints?
48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays, seems like a fair balancing of the employees right to know and the employers need to resolve a matter of internal theft in a timely manner.
Where are the EPPA false positives complaints?
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Dec 23, 2008, 08:09 PMQuotePolygraph was restricted because in the late 70's early 80's we (private examiners) refused to clean our own house and police our own. Abuses led to a public backlash and EPPA.
Also because of concern regarding THE RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY of the polygraph. IOW, concern over whether the polygraph can and does actually do what it is pro ported to do.
QuoteToday employees receive 48 hour written notice, not including weekends or holidays, so they can do research or seek whatever advice they desire.
Wow, a whole 48 HOURS! To research the polygraph and get advice. The average person could devour and comprehend the NAS report in that amount of time!
Get serious, that isn't enough time.TC
Posted by pailryder
- Dec 23, 2008, 07:50 PMMR Cullen
Polygraph was restricted because in the late 70's early 80's we (private examiners) refused to clean our own house and police our own. Abuses led to a public backlash and EPPA.
Today employees receive 48 hour written notice, not including weekends or holidays, so they can do research or seek whatever advice they desire. No job related action can be taken based on their refusal. They are informed of their right to consult with a repersentative before each phase. At the test I am required to provide a copy of their rights and required to READ it to them and obtain their signature that I have done so.
There are few complaints because employees are allowed to make well informed decesions and because with the addition of computer collection and scoring on single issue specific theft cases we get it right almost every time.
Polygraph was restricted because in the late 70's early 80's we (private examiners) refused to clean our own house and police our own. Abuses led to a public backlash and EPPA.
Today employees receive 48 hour written notice, not including weekends or holidays, so they can do research or seek whatever advice they desire. No job related action can be taken based on their refusal. They are informed of their right to consult with a repersentative before each phase. At the test I am required to provide a copy of their rights and required to READ it to them and obtain their signature that I have done so.
There are few complaints because employees are allowed to make well informed decesions and because with the addition of computer collection and scoring on single issue specific theft cases we get it right almost every time.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Dec 23, 2008, 01:20 PMQuoteHow would you account for this site's lack of false positive complaints under EPPA? Those employees receive 48 hour written notice, so we can assume they have time to search and become aware of this site and others.
People don't want to rock the boat. Many have come to this board perplexed as to what to do. They submit to peer pressure. They don't want to be the only employee who "refuses to take the polygraph". So then, if you fail despite telling the truth, on a polygraph you volunteered to take, under what grounds would you complain?
So here are you choices. Refuse to take the test claiming your right under EPPA, and get accused of hiding something. Or take the test voluntarily, submitting to peer pressure, and risk failing despite telling the truth. Most don't become aware of the latter until after the fact, and are totally blown away that they told the truth yet failed.
Are employees made aware of the fact that the polygraph has been found to be of limited reliabilty and of questionable validity by the scientific community? Are they made aware of the risk of coming up "false positive". It seems they should be made aware of this to make an intelligent decision whether to submit to it. And not just be given some long government form to sign. Their employer should go over all of the above with the employee. They should specifically point out that the polygraph is of questionable reliability, and that they could possibly fail even if they tell the truth.
A better question would be how do you account for all the false positives? Why had private sector polygraphs become restricted in the first place if they are 98% accurate as claimed by polygraph operators? Do employers realize that polygraph operators routinely lie to examinees during the test, FALSELY claiming 98%? They should be made aware of what they are subjecting their employees to.
TC
Posted by pailryder
- Dec 23, 2008, 11:28 AMMr Cullen
Perhaps, but most employees tell me they they are aware of the risk but choose to cooperate because the alternative is to continue working with a thief and a liar.
Perhaps, but most employees tell me they they are aware of the risk but choose to cooperate because the alternative is to continue working with a thief and a liar.
Posted by pailryder
- Dec 23, 2008, 11:18 AMMr Cullen
How would you account for this site's lack of false positive complaints under EPPA? Those employees receive 48 hour written notice, so we can assume they have time to search and become aware of this site and others.
How would you account for this site's lack of false positive complaints under EPPA? Those employees receive 48 hour written notice, so we can assume they have time to search and become aware of this site and others.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Dec 22, 2008, 09:20 PMQuoteThey are good employees who understand their employers legitimate need to investigate and resolve an important situation, ie a workplace theft. Even if they fail, no job related action can be taken against them without additional evidence. I agree that is a good thing and I would not be opposed to extension of that protection to governmental use, if proper exemptions are provided.
But they probably gullible like most of the public, and believe the polygraph is a valid and reliable test, and that all they have to do is just in there and "tell the truth" and all will be fine. Most are unaware they can tell the truth and be labeled a liar, and have eyebrows raised against them.
Who wants to be employed someplace where they are "that guy/gal who failed the polygraph!".
TC
Posted by pailryder
- Dec 22, 2008, 09:46 AMMr Scalabrini
Employees who submit to EPPA "tests" are not fools. They are good employees who understand their employers legitimate need to investigate and resolve an important situation, ie a workplace theft. Even if they fail, no job related action can be taken against them without additional evidence. I agree that is a good thing and I would not be opposed to extension of that protection to governmental use, if proper exemptions are provided.
I am unable to find anyone who tracks the number of EPPA tests. I have personally conducted more than one thousand and I am one lone examiner. The fact that your site sees so few complaints of false positive under EPPA is striking to me, and your explanation is not entirely satisfactory.
Do you have something more recent than a preEPPA 60 Minutes segment from the 1980's? That is more than twenty years old and well before the advent of computerized collection and scoring systems.
Thank you for the thoughtful and respectful exchange of ideas on this topic.
Employees who submit to EPPA "tests" are not fools. They are good employees who understand their employers legitimate need to investigate and resolve an important situation, ie a workplace theft. Even if they fail, no job related action can be taken against them without additional evidence. I agree that is a good thing and I would not be opposed to extension of that protection to governmental use, if proper exemptions are provided.
I am unable to find anyone who tracks the number of EPPA tests. I have personally conducted more than one thousand and I am one lone examiner. The fact that your site sees so few complaints of false positive under EPPA is striking to me, and your explanation is not entirely satisfactory.
Do you have something more recent than a preEPPA 60 Minutes segment from the 1980's? That is more than twenty years old and well before the advent of computerized collection and scoring systems.
Thank you for the thoughtful and respectful exchange of ideas on this topic.
Posted by G Scalabr
- Dec 22, 2008, 03:03 AMQuoteWould you care to guess how many test are conducted in compliance with this law each year?
I'm not exactly sure, but I'm willing to bet that it's a small fraction of the number of "tests" that were being done annually prior to the enactment of this legislation. If you have these numbers, I would be interested in seeing them.
QuoteHow many posters to this site since 1988 have claimed to be false positive on an EPPA sanctioned test?None, that I can remember--probably because so few of these "tests" are now occurring in the private sector.
With regard to an apparently unsanctioned "test," we had a poster report polygraph abuse in the private sector less than two weeks ago.
Bottom line is that outside of government, the EPPA has reduced polygraphy to a nearly non-existent level compared to how it existed before this legislation was enacted.
Preemployment screening is now limited to just a handful of private industries (pharmaceutical, armored car, etc) that would be lucky to comprise one percent of total private sector jobs.
More importantly, "specific issue tests" are now VOLUNTARY. No action can be taken against an employee who refuses one.
Anyone who submits to such testing is a fool, as viewers of the 1986 60 Minutes segment described on page 21 ofThe Lie Behind the Lie Detector quickly became aware.
Posted by pailryder
- Dec 21, 2008, 11:21 PMMr Cullen
The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 restricted private workplace polygraph, but did not end polygraph in the private workplace, even mandatory preemployment screening exams are allowed under certain conditions.
Would you care to guess how many test are conducted in compliance with this law each year? How about the number of complaints filed with the Dept. of Labor? How many posters to this site since 1988 have claimed to be false positive on an EPPA sanctioned test?
In spite of EPPA, or maybe because of EPPA, twenty years have passed and private workplace polygraph testing in the US is alive and well.
Maybe its just me, but that doesn't fit my definition of abolished.
The Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988 restricted private workplace polygraph, but did not end polygraph in the private workplace, even mandatory preemployment screening exams are allowed under certain conditions.
Would you care to guess how many test are conducted in compliance with this law each year? How about the number of complaints filed with the Dept. of Labor? How many posters to this site since 1988 have claimed to be false positive on an EPPA sanctioned test?
In spite of EPPA, or maybe because of EPPA, twenty years have passed and private workplace polygraph testing in the US is alive and well.
Maybe its just me, but that doesn't fit my definition of abolished.
Posted by T.M. Cullen
- Dec 20, 2008, 08:49 PMLike Gino said
Would you agree that the polygraph has been abolished for non-government employees?
Of course, many still volunteer to take it when asked by police to "eliminate" themselves as "suspects", which is of course another charade.
TC
QuoteWe are simply trying to close the loophole exemption for government entities in order to fully abolish it.
Would you agree that the polygraph has been abolished for non-government employees?
Of course, many still volunteer to take it when asked by police to "eliminate" themselves as "suspects", which is of course another charade.
TC