- Welcome to AntiPolygraph.org Message Board.
A forum for free and open discussion of polygraph-related topics
Posted by Jack B
- Oct 06, 2011, 07:11 PMI disagree with the statement about LE examiners not having unfettered power. Even though he said they cannot DQ someone based on his report, my polygrapher and myself are not stupid. If someone fails the polygraph, they will not get hired. He is unchecked in the sense that he has the sole power as to whether or not someone proceeds to next step of the process.
Think about it like this, all the other stages of selection are for the most part fair and are decided pretty much on your qualifications and background.
1st Step: A written exam. In that exam you control your fate as to whether or not you move on, you don't get a 90 and then they say "well, you aren't moving forward". Now granted, some places do a rank system based on your score and in that sense studying harder will give you a higher score and automatically ranked means you move on to next step regardless of anything else or anyone. In this agency, our tests were pass/fail so I passed the exam and I moved on.
2nd Step (depending where you are applying to): An interview, again you control your fate. Yes the panel decides whether you move on or not, but if YOU and ONLY YOU present yourself well, you know you will move on.
3rd Step: PT test for alot of places (not for this last agency I took the poly for), if you are in shape you will automatically move on to next phase. Pretty simple and fair.
4th Step: Polygraph, Your fate here no matter what you do is LARGELY out of your hands. You have to agree on this, no matter what you do or say or your background, this is completely out of your hands as it was in my case. I told the truth and from there could only hope I passed. It is here where the unchecked power of the polygrapher makes his own decision based on his own testing or reasons. You have no say in it. Please don't say "well, if you tell the truth, you do!" because even if you tell the truth you can still fail.
5th Step: BI. Now at this point we are back to having some control over your fate. If you have a solid background and even made it to the point of a BI odds are you are good to go. I never failed a BI. This is where alot of people get jammed up because of the lies they might have mentioned on an application. However, if you are a solid guy and know you are, then once you get to the BI you know you have nothing to worry about. Granted some agencies are so small that sometimes the hiring panel will pass you up because there are a ton of good applicants but at least here you can have some control as to whether or not you will pass.
6th step: Med/Psych. Medical is pretty easy, if you have no problems you once again control if you pass or fail. Psych can get a little complicated but in regards to that again, you can control if you pass or not since the questions have standardized responses (i.e. if you saying you are answering that you have thought about killing yourself, it is your fault alone that you failed).
I guess all I'm trying to say this is, out of all these little steps, the polygraph is the only one where it seems chance has a greater say as to whether you pass than merit or background.
Think about it like this, all the other stages of selection are for the most part fair and are decided pretty much on your qualifications and background.
1st Step: A written exam. In that exam you control your fate as to whether or not you move on, you don't get a 90 and then they say "well, you aren't moving forward". Now granted, some places do a rank system based on your score and in that sense studying harder will give you a higher score and automatically ranked means you move on to next step regardless of anything else or anyone. In this agency, our tests were pass/fail so I passed the exam and I moved on.
2nd Step (depending where you are applying to): An interview, again you control your fate. Yes the panel decides whether you move on or not, but if YOU and ONLY YOU present yourself well, you know you will move on.
3rd Step: PT test for alot of places (not for this last agency I took the poly for), if you are in shape you will automatically move on to next phase. Pretty simple and fair.
4th Step: Polygraph, Your fate here no matter what you do is LARGELY out of your hands. You have to agree on this, no matter what you do or say or your background, this is completely out of your hands as it was in my case. I told the truth and from there could only hope I passed. It is here where the unchecked power of the polygrapher makes his own decision based on his own testing or reasons. You have no say in it. Please don't say "well, if you tell the truth, you do!" because even if you tell the truth you can still fail.
5th Step: BI. Now at this point we are back to having some control over your fate. If you have a solid background and even made it to the point of a BI odds are you are good to go. I never failed a BI. This is where alot of people get jammed up because of the lies they might have mentioned on an application. However, if you are a solid guy and know you are, then once you get to the BI you know you have nothing to worry about. Granted some agencies are so small that sometimes the hiring panel will pass you up because there are a ton of good applicants but at least here you can have some control as to whether or not you will pass.
6th step: Med/Psych. Medical is pretty easy, if you have no problems you once again control if you pass or fail. Psych can get a little complicated but in regards to that again, you can control if you pass or not since the questions have standardized responses (i.e. if you saying you are answering that you have thought about killing yourself, it is your fault alone that you failed).
I guess all I'm trying to say this is, out of all these little steps, the polygraph is the only one where it seems chance has a greater say as to whether you pass than merit or background.
Posted by Jack B
- Oct 06, 2011, 06:40 PMQuote from: Bill_Brown on Oct 05, 2011, 10:42 PMStefano,
I do agree that a follow up exam should have been conducted, (break out exam). I do not agree with DQ's based solely on polygraph results.
I did get a tad annoyed when I was told that there was a possibility of a follow up exam that would feature questions directed toward the areas where I was "deceptive" in order to clear up the polygraph results. Also, I didn't like being told "Well, the polygraph cannot be used as a means to DQ you and maybe we will do a follow up" just to be told a few days later that I am being DQ'd because of my polygraph results.
Looking back, perhaps the polygrapher didn't want to put himself in an awkward position by telling me I was no longer in the process because when I asked my investigator if I could be poly'd again to clear up this misunderstanding he said they don't allow people to re-poly and would simply have to apply again.
I am not stupid and coming from LE, I knew the moment he said I failed the poly when we were in that room that I was going to get DQ'd. Also, the odds of me getting hired ever by the agency is slim to none since they keep the results for a few years so yeah....I don't know, I'm going to go back next year and tell them "Well guys, I failed your polygraph the first time but this time I plan to pass with the same responses I gave last year since that was the truth". Not gonna happen, so I assume that I am on a blacklist with them most likely. If you failed one poly, I don't see that agency ever wanting to deal with you again. Looking back on my first poly, I think I passed that one since it is a MUCH MUCH larger agency (1st poly was for an agency with about 4500 sworn personnel and this latest one was with about 400 sworn).
At the end of the day I just don't know. It's all just so.....shady.
Posted by pailryder
- Oct 06, 2011, 05:29 PMQuote from: stefano on Oct 06, 2011, 10:16 AMSo if agency policy conflicts with APA standards, they should just prostitute themselves and do as they are told?Yes, just like all other federal, state, and local government employees, they go along. Rogues rarely draw government retirement benefits.
Posted by stefano
- Oct 06, 2011, 10:16 AMQuote from: pailryder on Oct 06, 2011, 06:47 AMThey follow the rules of the agency that employes them, unless they are self-employed private examiners, they do not decide policy matters.So if agency policy conflicts with APA standards, they should just prostitute themselves and do as they are told? I think it is more likely that the agency will just take as gospel what the examiner says--they are unchecked and unfettered.
If you dislike "absurd" statements, try countering them with a logical argument instead of acting like an immature kid on a playground. You will never do damage to me, but you certainly erode your own professional posture.
Posted by pailryder
- Oct 06, 2011, 06:47 AMJack B
There are, as we both know, problems with pre employment polygraph. I am a private examiner. In the private sector this type of test ended in 1988 with the passage of the Employee Polygraph Protection Act, which has worked well, has generated few complaints, and could be extended to the governmental work place.
But one thing LE pre employment is not is a cash cow, LE examiners do not personally profit from failing applicants. One thing LE examiners do not have is unfettered power. They follow the rules of the agency that employes them, unless they are self-employed private examiners, they do not decide policy matters. They all report to someone, a chief, a sheriff, or agency director.
My reply to the Lex Luthor of Polygraph was not an argument, just sarcasm, pure and simple, directed at his absurd statements, not at you.
I totally agree with you. Your attitude is commendable. Bitterness will not get you where you should be. Persistence will. Hang in there.
There are, as we both know, problems with pre employment polygraph. I am a private examiner. In the private sector this type of test ended in 1988 with the passage of the Employee Polygraph Protection Act, which has worked well, has generated few complaints, and could be extended to the governmental work place.
But one thing LE pre employment is not is a cash cow, LE examiners do not personally profit from failing applicants. One thing LE examiners do not have is unfettered power. They follow the rules of the agency that employes them, unless they are self-employed private examiners, they do not decide policy matters. They all report to someone, a chief, a sheriff, or agency director.
My reply to the Lex Luthor of Polygraph was not an argument, just sarcasm, pure and simple, directed at his absurd statements, not at you.
Quote from: gater12345678 on Oct 05, 2011, 08:56 PMto disqualify someone from an employment opportunity JUST because of the polygraph results is not cool.
I totally agree with you. Your attitude is commendable. Bitterness will not get you where you should be. Persistence will. Hang in there.
Posted by Bill_Brown
- Oct 06, 2011, 03:08 AMStefano,
I was not offended, no apology is necessary. We are in agreement. I am retired now and will work diligently to get legislation. I am sure if all worked together in an effort to curtail the problems, legislators would listen. I am against abolishing the use of polygraph.
I was not offended, no apology is necessary. We are in agreement. I am retired now and will work diligently to get legislation. I am sure if all worked together in an effort to curtail the problems, legislators would listen. I am against abolishing the use of polygraph.
Posted by stefano
- Oct 06, 2011, 02:08 AMRegarding the "knuckle-dragger" comment. I did not mean to offend, I was trying to emphasize that many top-notch applicants are being cast aside like old shoes without recourse. I'll endeavor to be less caustic in my wording.
Posted by Bill_Brown
- Oct 05, 2011, 10:42 PMStefano,
I do agree that a follow up exam should have been conducted, (break out exam). I do not agree with DQ's based solely on polygraph results. The one question that Jack B quoted also bothers me. It is not properly formulated in my opinion.
There is a movement within the polygraph organizations to standardize testing and provide quality control. Until we have National Legislation requiring accountability and standardization, nothing will change. I have talked with Senator's and Representatives regarding legislation.
Jack B
I appreciate your kind remarks, and would like to follow up on your complaint in some manner if possible. You can private message me and maybe your information can be used to help others. THis web site is invaluable to older examiners, it keeps us in touch with the reality of what our decisions cost others.
I do agree that a follow up exam should have been conducted, (break out exam). I do not agree with DQ's based solely on polygraph results. The one question that Jack B quoted also bothers me. It is not properly formulated in my opinion.
There is a movement within the polygraph organizations to standardize testing and provide quality control. Until we have National Legislation requiring accountability and standardization, nothing will change. I have talked with Senator's and Representatives regarding legislation.
Jack B
I appreciate your kind remarks, and would like to follow up on your complaint in some manner if possible. You can private message me and maybe your information can be used to help others. THis web site is invaluable to older examiners, it keeps us in touch with the reality of what our decisions cost others.
Posted by Jack B
- Oct 05, 2011, 08:56 PMLook, the business between you two is your own and I have read a bit around the site and you two seem to go back and forth.
I can see both sides of the argument, as someone in prior LE the polygraph can be a useful tool sometimes. However, to disqualify someone from an employment opportunity JUST because of the polygraph results is not cool.
Pailryder, even you must admit that probably doesn't make sense. How can I pass one polygraph and fail another when I answered the same way? Does this make sense? I'm a person of reason and logic, and you can't say that the polygraph is so accurate or reliable when my experience has shown that it seems closer to chance.
Before I went to my polygraph, about a week prior I had an appointment set up for the next phase in the process. So after I failed the poly, I get a call few days later saying don't bother showing up (albeit in a more professional and polite tone). I was pretty upset that the results of my polygraph were the sole reason I was kicked out of the process.
Pailryder, I won't knock what you do for a living because honestly, if I could be a polygrapher and make good money doing it then why not? But you cannot be this naive in regards to its reliability. Also, I think the point Stefano was making is that there is no accountability in regards to how the polygraph is used. So the sarcastic response you made does indeed say alot about your ability to make a counter argument. It's cool though, keep the hustle up, don't blame you in this economy.
"No good social purpose can be served by inventing ways of beating the lie detector or deceiving polygraphers." If polygraphs don't work and they are being used indiscriminately then a social good does exist in beating them. Sorry.
I can see both sides of the argument, as someone in prior LE the polygraph can be a useful tool sometimes. However, to disqualify someone from an employment opportunity JUST because of the polygraph results is not cool.
Pailryder, even you must admit that probably doesn't make sense. How can I pass one polygraph and fail another when I answered the same way? Does this make sense? I'm a person of reason and logic, and you can't say that the polygraph is so accurate or reliable when my experience has shown that it seems closer to chance.
Before I went to my polygraph, about a week prior I had an appointment set up for the next phase in the process. So after I failed the poly, I get a call few days later saying don't bother showing up (albeit in a more professional and polite tone). I was pretty upset that the results of my polygraph were the sole reason I was kicked out of the process.
Pailryder, I won't knock what you do for a living because honestly, if I could be a polygrapher and make good money doing it then why not? But you cannot be this naive in regards to its reliability. Also, I think the point Stefano was making is that there is no accountability in regards to how the polygraph is used. So the sarcastic response you made does indeed say alot about your ability to make a counter argument. It's cool though, keep the hustle up, don't blame you in this economy.
"No good social purpose can be served by inventing ways of beating the lie detector or deceiving polygraphers." If polygraphs don't work and they are being used indiscriminately then a social good does exist in beating them. Sorry.
Posted by stefano
- Oct 05, 2011, 08:40 PMPailryder, you are exhibiting all the desperate signs of someone who has lost an argument.
Posted by pailryder
- Oct 05, 2011, 08:34 PMWoe is us! For years we have used our unchecked power to accumulate vast wealth from our cash cow while filling the ranks of police departments with knuckle-draggers. But now we are exposed, laid bare to the world by the Lex Luthor of Polygraph.
Posted by stefano
- Oct 05, 2011, 05:42 PMBill Brown,
As you can see, the man behind the curtain has unchecked power: there is no recourse, no overseer, no checks and balances. Jack B seems like a very reasonable person, the kind I would prefer to see behind a badge. But because the man behind the curtain gives him a thumbs down, we wind up with the knuckle-draggers.
In previous postings you said to blame the agency, not the examiners for not following APA guidelines. I'm sure you can tell from Jack B's details that the polygraph technique was not followed--zero successive hurdles. Should not the APA (and decent examiners) be standing up and vociferously protesting such arrogant and unfair practices?--perhaps because it's a cash cow?
The double standard is nauseating.
As you can see, the man behind the curtain has unchecked power: there is no recourse, no overseer, no checks and balances. Jack B seems like a very reasonable person, the kind I would prefer to see behind a badge. But because the man behind the curtain gives him a thumbs down, we wind up with the knuckle-draggers.
In previous postings you said to blame the agency, not the examiners for not following APA guidelines. I'm sure you can tell from Jack B's details that the polygraph technique was not followed--zero successive hurdles. Should not the APA (and decent examiners) be standing up and vociferously protesting such arrogant and unfair practices?--perhaps because it's a cash cow?
The double standard is nauseating.
Posted by Jack B
- Oct 05, 2011, 05:15 PMQuote from: stefano on Oct 04, 2011, 10:16 PMQuote from: gater12345678 on Oct 04, 2011, 08:49 PMEven then he did screw me over but did so in a manner that left me with no ill feelings toward the polygrapher.Most cunning....
I don't hold grudges.
Posted by Jack B
- Oct 05, 2011, 05:14 PMQuote from: Bill_Brown on Oct 04, 2011, 10:09 PMI am an examiner and do have a couple of questions. Was the wording of the question"Other than the crimes you mentioned, have you ever committed any other crime that you didn't get caught doing?"
Do you remember the other questions? I am not aware of a 14 question format, and would be interested to know. If you feel a private IM would be a better way to respond that would be fine also.
I am sorry for your experience with this particular examination and wish you the best on the next one. We examiners have been wrong on some examinations and polygraph should not be used as a DQ, it should be used as an investigative tool.
I do remember most of the questions, the majority were about my past LE experience, one question about my drug use, the one question about crimes I committed that I didn't get caught and I believe 4 questions that were ones I would say yes to "Is your name ____?" etc. Some of the other questions were "Have you ever remained silent in regards to another officer breaking general orders?" "Have you ever tampered with evidence?" "Other than the times mentioned, have you ever done illegal narcotics?" "Have you ever abused your authority as a police officer?"
Honestly, I am over it now and just trying to move forward. I have no ill feelings toward the polygrapher, I just think for this to be used as a reason to DQ me is kind of grimey. It is going to be super awkward when I take my next poly in Nov for a different agency and I tell them I failed this one.
Posted by stefano
- Oct 04, 2011, 10:16 PMQuote from: gater12345678 on Oct 04, 2011, 08:49 PMEven then he did screw me over but did so in a manner that left me with no ill feelings toward the polygrapher.Most cunning....