- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by failedpoly
- Jan 13, 2011, 04:54 PMLike many people on this form, I recently failed my poly (completely floored that this happened) and was unsuccessful at appealing. I was wondering, if I applied for another federal agency (i.e. the CIA or another agency that administers a poly) and passed their poly, would the FBI honor that down the road if I re-applied with them?
Also, has anyone heard if writing to your congressmember or having someone within the FBI appeal for you would make a difference?
I hate that failing the poly absorbs so much of my mind...I can't stop thinking about it and replaying that day in my mind and wondering what I could have done differently.
Also, has anyone heard if writing to your congressmember or having someone within the FBI appeal for you would make a difference?
I hate that failing the poly absorbs so much of my mind...I can't stop thinking about it and replaying that day in my mind and wondering what I could have done differently.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jan 07, 2011, 08:15 PMQuote from: Arthur K on Jan 05, 2011, 12:51 PMI was an FBI employee and was selected for a CI poly after being suspected of something that was proven later to be ridiculously untrue. However, even when I kept my status quo, the FBI came back to me after a length of time from my poly and stated that it is their policy to take away FBI access from an employee who failed a poly regardless of the reason. Basically fail poly = lose FBI access = lose of job. I want to appeal and get another poly. How should I do this since I am no longer in the bu.
Arthur,
I don't know of any administrative process for former federal employees to appeal the loss of their jobs over the rescinding of their security clearances. The courts have ruled that executive branch security clearance decisions are not subject to judicial review. However, there may be other legal avenues of appeal.
I'm not a lawyer and am unable to advise you in this regard. There are a handful of lawyers in the Washington, DC area who specialize in national security law and procedure who might be able to advise you. One whom I know is Mark S. Zaid:
https://www.markzaid.com
Posted by Magnus
- Jan 06, 2011, 09:33 AMRemoving an employee's clearance is the "new" way of moving employees out of a position. It's happened to several federal employees I know. DHS is one of the worst offenders. A clearance is not a right and it is granted by an agency. With most federal agencies you have a right to appeal a denial of a clearance, but get ready to pay big $$ for an attorney to battle an agency that has an endless supply of money and personnel. The FBI (aka: Fan Belt Inspectors) is a unique agency. Your rights as an employee are limited. As a condition of employment, FBI personnel are required to sign a document stating they can be mandated to take a polygraph. Refusing an exam can be used as a basis for administrative action (i.e. you're outta here). The FBI is still a "good old boys club" and if get on their bad side they will find a way to remove you.
Posted by Twoblock
- Jan 05, 2011, 08:41 PMArthur K
You were only suspected and proven later to be untrue?? It seems to me that this is totally ripe for a damage federal lawsuit. This and all government agencies should be held accountable for their stupid decisions and actions and I believe that a lawsuit is the best way to do this. Out'em.
You were only suspected and proven later to be untrue?? It seems to me that this is totally ripe for a damage federal lawsuit. This and all government agencies should be held accountable for their stupid decisions and actions and I believe that a lawsuit is the best way to do this. Out'em.
Posted by Arthur K
- Jan 05, 2011, 12:51 PMI was an FBI employee and was selected for a CI poly after being suspected of something that was proven later to be ridiculously untrue. However, even when I kept my status quo, the FBI came back to me after a length of time from my poly and stated that it is their policy to take away FBI access from an employee who failed a poly regardless of the reason. Basically fail poly = lose FBI access = lose of job. I want to appeal and get another poly. How should I do this since I am no longer in the bu.
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jun 05, 2006, 03:45 PMQuote from: terrified on Jun 05, 2006, 02:51 PMDo people actually pass an FBI repoly and continue?
Virtually never.
Quotearent the FBI more nuts than others about the poly?
Yes, at least at the pre-employment stage.
Posted by terrified
- Jun 05, 2006, 02:51 PMDo people actually pass an FBI repoly and continue?
arent the FBI more nuts than others about the poly?
arent the FBI more nuts than others about the poly?
Posted by George W. Maschke
- Jun 03, 2006, 10:02 AMQuote from: EosJupiter on Jun 03, 2006, 03:30 AMAll Concerned,
I dredged this one up because it best fits the point of the following article. The article gives the hiring numbers to application for FBI positions. Just from the shear volume and limited positions, I now do support the position even more so that the polygraph is used by the FBI to cull out undersireables and only pass the select few that they believe they want. Using the polygraph as a way to bypass EO hiring rules.
EosJupiter,
Thanks for the article link! With 400,000 job seekers for 1,800 positions in 2005, the FBI is certainly not wanting for applicants. But these numbers don't in and of themselves support the notion that the polygraph is systematically being used to "cull out" applicants based on bias.
Keep in mind that by the time a special agent applicant is scheduled for a polygraph, he/she has already passed Phase I and Phase II testing[/url]. The latter consists of a structured interview and written exercise. It is at this point that applicants are most readily rejected for reasons that may be less than objective.
By the time a special agent applicant reports for the polygraph, a decision has already been made that he/she seems to be suitable for FBI hire. Of course, polygrapher bias may also come into play (see pp. 71-72 of the 4th edition of The Lie Behind the Lie Detector. But I don't think the HR Magazine article supports the argument that the polygraph is routinely and purposefully being used in the way that you suggest.
Polygraphy's complete lack of scientific underpinnings, inherent bias against the truthful, and repeatedly demonstrated inability to detect national security threats are reason enough for the FBI and other agencies to scrap the polygraph.
Posted by EosJupiter
- Jun 03, 2006, 03:30 AMAll Concerned,
I dredged this one up because it best fits the point of the following article. The article gives the hiring numbers to application for FBI positions. Just from the shear volume and limited positions, I now do support the position even more so that the polygraph is used by the FBI to cull out undersireables and only pass the select few that they believe they want. Using the polygraph as a way to bypass EO hiring rules. The Article Link follows:
http://www.shrm.org/hrmagazine/articles/0606/0606pomeroy.asp
Article slice:
Some Unique Challenges
"What is different in the government," Packham says, "is a complexity not required in the private sector." Because of laws and because of the size of the federal government, "time and pace" are slower than in private industry, he says.
That's particularly evident in the hiring process. It takes the FBI an average of 240 days to hire someone, he says. Although Packham found this frustrating at first, he has come to understand the reasons for proceeding slowly.
Unlike most other government agencies, many FBI jobs demand top secret clearance, which requires polygraph tests and extensive, time-consuming background checks conducted by special agents.
"If we had a problem finding employees, we'd make some changes," Packham says. However, 400,000 candidates applied last year to fill about 1,800 jobs at the FBI.
"People are attracted to the FBI because of a sense of the purpose and mission of the organization," Packham says, and not because of money. Since Sept. 11, 2001, the agency has hired 30 percent more special agents, bringing the total number to 12,500.
----
400,000 applications for 1800 jobs, no wonder they can screw over anyone they want. This out of the HR head of the FBI. THe source doesn't get any better than that.
FYI & Regards
I dredged this one up because it best fits the point of the following article. The article gives the hiring numbers to application for FBI positions. Just from the shear volume and limited positions, I now do support the position even more so that the polygraph is used by the FBI to cull out undersireables and only pass the select few that they believe they want. Using the polygraph as a way to bypass EO hiring rules. The Article Link follows:
http://www.shrm.org/hrmagazine/articles/0606/0606pomeroy.asp
Article slice:
Some Unique Challenges
"What is different in the government," Packham says, "is a complexity not required in the private sector." Because of laws and because of the size of the federal government, "time and pace" are slower than in private industry, he says.
That's particularly evident in the hiring process. It takes the FBI an average of 240 days to hire someone, he says. Although Packham found this frustrating at first, he has come to understand the reasons for proceeding slowly.
Unlike most other government agencies, many FBI jobs demand top secret clearance, which requires polygraph tests and extensive, time-consuming background checks conducted by special agents.
"If we had a problem finding employees, we'd make some changes," Packham says. However, 400,000 candidates applied last year to fill about 1,800 jobs at the FBI.
"People are attracted to the FBI because of a sense of the purpose and mission of the organization," Packham says, and not because of money. Since Sept. 11, 2001, the agency has hired 30 percent more special agents, bringing the total number to 12,500.
----
400,000 applications for 1800 jobs, no wonder they can screw over anyone they want. This out of the HR head of the FBI. THe source doesn't get any better than that.
FYI & Regards
Posted by KSLawDog
- Apr 30, 2005, 04:38 PMFor all who are considering an FBI polygraph appeal:
Please be advised that the FBI does conduct routine polygraphs for certain positions, such as counterterrorism and perhaps others. This was told to me by my applicant coordinator when was a candidate going through the same process.
I would encourage all false positives to request retests as I have done so myself. (Not with any luck I may add)
However, should you get a retest and pass; you may want to ask yourself "Do I want to work for an organization who may conduct routine polygraphs?"
Keep in mind that if you falely fail a routine polygraph years down the road you career will probably be over.
Please be advised that the FBI does conduct routine polygraphs for certain positions, such as counterterrorism and perhaps others. This was told to me by my applicant coordinator when was a candidate going through the same process.
I would encourage all false positives to request retests as I have done so myself. (Not with any luck I may add)
However, should you get a retest and pass; you may want to ask yourself "Do I want to work for an organization who may conduct routine polygraphs?"
Keep in mind that if you falely fail a routine polygraph years down the road you career will probably be over.
Posted by NSAreject
- Apr 17, 2005, 01:58 PMEosJupiter,
You are absolutely correct (as an ex-NSA employee,
of 10+ years), and that is why the poly cannot be
reviewed or challenged. They will also screw you, if you
have any issues, and you either leave the Government,
or change companies; they simply will not transfer your
SCI access. Sounds rather passive-aggressive...
You are absolutely correct (as an ex-NSA employee,
of 10+ years), and that is why the poly cannot be
reviewed or challenged. They will also screw you, if you
have any issues, and you either leave the Government,
or change companies; they simply will not transfer your
SCI access. Sounds rather passive-aggressive...
Posted by EosJupiter
- Apr 16, 2005, 03:53 AMMany years ago after I served in the Navy (NSGA) I applied to the NSA & CIA, at the time I thought that its what I really wanted. After the interview processes, I passed the NSA poly, but blew the CIA poly. THe NSA didn't offer me the job because, at that time I didn't have a degree or background (except my navy training) to get hired with, and blew there written exam. At CIA I blew the polygraph, or at least they said I did, to sum it up, all these agencies use one method or another to cull applicants. I believe that you were already slotted to fail, long before you even walked into that room with the examiner. I just wish I would have known about this info on this website before I did those poly's, would have made my time in the chair much easier. Just my opinion and don't sweat the exam failure, there is more out there than just working as a federal stooge. good luck EJ
Posted by yatittle
- Apr 15, 2005, 04:52 PMYes, a congressional inquiry is the best way to get any information pertaining to security clearances or federal employment. The FBI or whatever agency will answer congress members in a heartbeat.
Good job on getting your information!
Randy
Good job on getting your information!
Randy
Posted by Bill Crider
- Apr 15, 2005, 02:10 PMi got mine in about 8 weeks, but i sent the letter thru my congressman
Posted by polyfool
- Apr 15, 2005, 01:20 PMI'd be interested to find out some info. myself on getting the file. I requested mine, was told it didn't exist (yeah, right) and then filed an appeal for it. It has been located and I'm waiting on the FBI to send it to me. To request your file, go online to FBI.gov and there's a section on FOIPA requests, which is what you want. Fill out the form. Faxing it will save you some time over mailing it, but it may be a better idea to send it certified mail, so there is a record of your request. Does anyone know about how long it takes to receive the file either through a request or an appeal?