2/3 Border Patrol job applicants fail polygraph test, making hiring difficult

[Wendell]

Two out of three applicants to CBP fail its polygraph test, according to the agency. That’s more than double the average rate of eight law enforcement agencies that provided data to the Associated Press under open-records requests. It's a big reason approximately 2,000 jobs at the nation's largest law enforcement agency are empty, with the Border Patrol, a part of CBP, recently slipping below 20,000 agents for the first time since 2009. And it has raised questions of whether the lie detector tests are being properly administered. CBP Commissioner Gil Kerlikowske said the failure rate is too high, but that is largely because the agency hasn't attracted the applicants it wants. He and other law enforcement experts contend the polygraphs are generally working as intended at the agency, which has been trying to root out bribery and other corruption. But others, including lawmakers, union leaders and polygraph experts, contend that the use of lie detectors has gone awry and that many applicants are being subjected to unusually long and hostile interrogations, which some say can make people look deceptive even when they are telling the truth.
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-border-patrol-lies-20170113-story.html (http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-border-patrol-lies-20170113-story.html)

[TGS]

In the case of Border Patrol specifically, a review was already conducted and found the tests were being conducted improperly, resulting in the dismal amount of failures.

I don't know if that applies to Air and Marine Operations, a separate agency from Border Patrol within CBP, which is what they're focusing on in the article with the ex-military pilot.

[TheNewbie]

This is what concerns me most about applying for CBP. Even if I am honest there is a decent chance I will fail.

[Coyotesfan97]

The three and a half hour polygraph exam I endured to get hired ranks right up there in my things that sucked list. I have heard from others who went to that particular polygraph examiner also had a rough time.

[HCM]

In the case of Border Patrol specifically, a review was already conducted and found the tests were being conducted improperly, resulting in the dismal amount of failures.

I don't know if that applies to Air and Marine Operations, a separate agency from Border Patrol within CBP, which is what they're focusing on in the article with the ex-military pilot.

It applies to all CBP. Congress had hearings on this topic in June of 2016.

https://antipolygraph.org/blog/2016/07/01/sen-jeff-flake-raises-concern-over-cbp-polygraph-practices/

At least part of the issue mis the quality of the contract polygraphers CBP has been using.

[Arbninftry]

I just went through the CBP Poly ten days ago.

It is everything as described. I have held a TS/SCI (14 years), and it was current up until last July (I left the organization carrying the clearance, on good terms,my clearance was good.) Army CI Officer and previous Infantry Officer. 28 months in Iraq with Kurds and Iraqis.

I walked out feeling like a career criminal and lower than shit. The worst I did was smoke something twenty+ years ago.

He told me I was lying about everything to include my name. It was stupid, the CBP Poly is horribly ran. Mine took six hours. The questions are for a twenty year old, not someone that spent any time in the real world or managing people.

I was told I failed, but I have not been released from the hiring process, so who knows what is going to happen.

I think the biggest problem the examiners have is the lines of questioning.
They were very ambiguous. One example how do you feel about someone taking credit for someone else's work.

Well, we all hate that and disagree with it.

But, if you have ever managed a large group and represented them, and the Commander says who did this. You raise your hand. You pass the praise on.

But, you just contradicted yourself in the eyes of the poly.

I personally think my examiner was an idiot, and the poly is pure Voodoo.

I understand they have a use, but the weakness comes from the poor examiners.

[Gray222]

Been through a bunch of them. Most are complete horseshit. Either the person doing the questioning isn't experienced enough to understand what machine says or they rely too heavily on it.

One of them I had stomach growls from the food I ate the day before, the test was at noon so I had no breakfast. Everytime my stomach made noises he said I was lying, I asked him if the machine could tell between my stomach making sounds and me lying he said yes and that's not even remotely true.

[Dr. No]

Polys are complete and utter bullshit.

Just remember, you can cheat on your wife your entire life and that's not a disqualifier, but if you smoked weed 20 years ago you're an obvious liar and you are lower than dogshit.

[blues]

This is what concerns me most about applying for CBP. Even if I am honest there is a decent chance I will fail.

Years ago my old partner who later voluntarily transferred to Deming, NM, was an experienced polygrapher / polygraphist. He agreed to test me at my own request. I was curious about the results if providing entirely honest answers to a variety of questions, some of which were pretty personal.

The machine was calibrated and tested and we proceeded with the Q&A. When it was over he told me that it showed that some of my responses were deceptive.

At that point I knew I would never voluntarily submit to a polygraph as I couldn't have been more honest with my replies during the examination.

[TAZ]

Dont the quote as extensive a history with polygraphs as some of you guys, but have had to take a few in my younger days. I honestly believe that the reason I passed is that I had little actual life experience. Pretty sure if I had to take one now I'd fail simply cause of understanding that life isn't black and white. Or I guess if I was working in an environment where that type of activity was required I'd have learned to be a better liar over the years.

I like how it seems that polygraphs are being run by kids with no interrogation experience for the most part. People's have come to rely on technology like life is really CSI. It is supposed to be a tool that can enable a skilled interrogator to discover your lies quicker. It's NOT supposed to be the tool that makes an inexperienced dipshit worth while.

[HCountyGuy]

Through all the research I've done after failing my first poly, I've come to the conclusion they're voodoo nonsense. I've passed CVSA and polys since my dreaded first one, and gave the same answers.

After finding out everyone in my applicant group at that department failed, I've become suspicious that those involved in the poly phase for that department have no business administering them. At least one applicant I figured would be a shoe-in due to already being in that particular field and seemed respectable enough.

I understand under certain conditions they're a useful tool, mostly to convince those uneducated on how they really work into fessing up. But they generally seem to screw honest people over.

[HCM]

Polygraphs are not admissible in court for a reason. What ever valusebthe do have is entirely dependent on the skill, knowledge and abilities of polygrapher.


http://youtu.be/AJ5aIvjNgao

[blues]

I remember that episode, HCM. Love it. And so f'n true.

[BehindBlueI's]

Polys are complete and utter bullshit.

This. Particularly for background random "did you ever" testing. The DoE did a pretty extensive study maybe 20 years ago after they screwed the pooch real bad accusing a scientist of stealing classified materials. They realized perhaps they'd put too much faith in the poly and wanted to really look at the science behind it. What they determined is that random crime detection was as good as a coin flip. Specific incident detection was about 75%. Easy to use countermeasures worked.

They are junk and would work just as well as the operator hooking you up to a copy machine. People confess to things they ordinarily wouldn't because they THINK the machine will detect them, and that's the only real purpose they have.

[Dr. No]

This. Particularly for background random "did you ever" testing. The DoE did a pretty extensive study maybe 20 years ago after they screwed the pooch real bad accusing a scientist of stealing classified materials. They realized perhaps they'd put too much faith in the poly and wanted to really look at the science behind it. What they determined is that random crime detection was as good as a coin flip. Specific incident detection was about 75%. Easy to use countermeasures worked.

They are junk and would work just as well as the operator hooking you up to a copy machine. People confess to things they ordinarily wouldn't because they THINK the machine will detect them, and that's the only real purpose they have.
They are excellent as a bluff during an interrogation, mostly because people who feel guilty and believe in the machine's infallibility will crack under pressure and confess. You are exactly right, for an exploratory "did you do bad stuff" mission, they are garbage.

[Kanati]

God, I don't miss poly's.

[psalms144.1]

Poly's are only as good as the person administering them. I've gone through at least a half dozen. First was administered by NSA, I was scared to death. Examiner talked me through the process, including the operand questions, before hooking me up. Less than an hour later, I was whistling down the hall having easily passed the exam. My last was administered by a new examiner in my own agency, started at 1100, went until 1700 (without a break) at which point I terminated the process. He told me my answers were truthful, but I had "artifacts" in my test. Not surprising, without food or water I'd been sitting in a t-shirt directly under an air conditioning vent for six hours. When the youngster started Reid technique-ing me, I told him to f off and left the room.

The next morning, his trainer agent asked me to redo the test, with the senior examiner. In and out in 90 minutes, clear as a bell, including a bunch of BSing about youngsters who shouldn't be running polygraphs...

That was a while ago, and I swore I'd never accept another position in my agency that requires a polygraph - life is simply too short...

[SkiDevil]

From the Queen of Liars.

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/06/clintons-1975-rape-case/

In 2014, the Washington Free Beacon published the audio of an interview that Arkansas reporter Roy Reed conducted with Clinton in the 1980s. In the interview, Clinton recalls some unusual details of the rape case, and she can be heard laughing in three instances, beginning with a joke she makes about the accuracy of polygraphs.
Clinton: Of course he claimed he didn’t. All this stuff. He took a lie detector test. I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs. [laughs]

I worked for a Private Investigator and Polygrapher, retired LE (Homicide Investigator), former military with extensive investigative and interviewing experience. Two things that I learned from him about polygraph testing: the greatest variable is the Examiner, polygraph detectors Do Not work on everyone.

A good polygraph examiner is produced through years of experience. A habitual liar can by pass the equipment more often than not.
I know of at least two individuals who lied their asses of in a polygraph examination and passed. Both were for employment related circumstances, one was for an LE position.

I do not have a great deal of faith in these devices and believe that an experienced investigator/ interragator is more effective in discerning the truthfulness of an individual.

[John Hearne]

A good polygraph examiner is produced through years of experience. A habitual liar can by pass the equipment more often than not.
I know of at least two individuals who lied their asses of in a polygraph examination and passed. Both were for employment related circumstances, one was for an LE position.

I do not have a great deal of faith in these devices and believe that an experienced investigator/ interragator is more effective in discerning the truthfulness of an individual.

As I understand it, sociopaths and especially psychopaths, aren't bothered by lying. n fact, it's how they've manipulated the world since they were young. If you not bothered, you don't get the arousal that the detector is looking for.

[TAZ]

So this is an interesting thread given the other one where we have claims that BP is being infiltrated by gangs and cartel types. So are the 2/3 being told no due to ploygraph results when in fact they may not be the correct demographic???

[blues]

So this is an interesting thread given the other one where we have claims that BP is being infiltrated by gangs and cartel types. So are the 2/3 being told no due to polygraph results when in fact they may not be the correct demographic???

NYPD pulled something similar in the late 70's. Despite getting 100% on the exam and getting called up for the physical etc., many "generic" white candidates were weeded out by being told they had one or more of any number of "maladies". However, if a father or brother was on the dept., there didn't seem to be the same issue. (Having an uncle on the dept. wasn't good enough and I was told by the detective working my case that I should just get a letter from my doctor to countermand their findings. I told them "no thanks" based upon my uncle's recommendation.)

That same year the entry exam, which was extremely easy but for the memorization section, was challenged as being culturally biased despite the fact that candidates who spoke English as a second language scored higher than the group that brought the suit.

I was actually interviewed by a late night radio host on WPLJ (as I recall) in regard to this discriminatory practice and it blew his mind. He had a hard time wrapping his head around the reverse discrimination / quota system.

[Wendell]

A memo by Kevin McAleenan, acting Customs and Border Protection commissioner, calls the polygraph as a “significant deterrent and point of failure” for applicants. The undated memo lays out a plan for the agency to build a force of 26,370 agents in five years. McAleenan said CBP is also considering a six-month experiment with an alternative polygraph test that takes less time to administer.
http://www.pressherald.com/2017/03/08/border-patrol-may-relax-lie-detector-requirement-for-new-hires/ (http://www.pressherald.com/2017/03/08/border-patrol-may-relax-lie-detector-requirement-for-new-hires/)

[blues]

A memo by Kevin McAleenan, acting Customs and Border Protection commissioner, calls the polygraph as a “significant deterrent and point of failure” for applicants. The undated memo lays out a plan for the agency to build a force of 26,370 agents in five years. McAleenan said CBP is also considering a six-month experiment with an alternative polygraph test that takes less time to administer.
http://www.pressherald.com/2017/03/08/border-patrol-may-relax-lie-detector-requirement-for-new-hires/ (http://www.pressherald.com/2017/03/08/border-patrol-may-relax-lie-detector-requirement-for-new-hires/)

I used to have a cassette tape of an interrogation performed by a cartel "doctor" on a poor wretched soul who had the bad luck of having a large load of dope confiscated by yours truly. He was an airport employee who was supposed to arrange the retrieval of the consignment from Miami Int'l Airport. (I received the tape from an informant who was still in the good graces of the narco-traffickers.)

The Colombian "polygraph" apparently consisted of alcohol, psychotropic drugs and the threat of physical anguish. In the background, while the guy is being interrogated you can hear a few "witnesses" cracking up and rolling over themselves as you listen to the poor bastard sink further and further into a stupor while responding as best he can to the questions. (The purpose of the "poly" was to determine if he had ripped off his masters.)

Maybe CBP can pick up a few new twists for their future applicant interviews. Lord knows that the standard polygraph methodology is beyond repair.

[XXXsilverXXX]

A memo by Kevin McAleenan, acting Customs and Border Protection commissioner, calls the polygraph as a “significant deterrent and point of failure” for applicants. The undated memo lays out a plan for the agency to build a force of 26,370 agents in five years. McAleenan said CBP is also considering a six-month experiment with an alternative polygraph test that takes less time to administer.
http://www.pressherald.com/2017/03/08/border-patrol-may-relax-lie-detector-requirement-for-new-hires/ (http://www.pressherald.com/2017/03/08/border-patrol-may-relax-lie-detector-requirement-for-new-hires/)

Voice stress test?

When I took a poly recently the interviewer said he had one person fail his drug test, but pass each of his polygraph questions relating to drug use...

Also...

https://www.forensicmag.com/news/2016/11/study-brain-scan-sees-lies-more-clearly-polygraph

[TheNewbie]

On the BP forum there is a rumor posted that the polygraph may be waived for law enforcement. I know there is a waiver for certain military personnel with the right clearance. Hopefully this well extend to others as well.

[blues]

The problem is relying upon a device whose interpretation is as much art as it is science. Since the polygrapher or polygraphist, (I always forget which is the proper term), is interpreting the data plus relying upon his or her impressions, we might as well substitute tea leaves, chicken guts or the magic 8 ball.

Someone's reputation and livelihood lies in the balance and absent clear and compelling evidence it just doesn't seem quite fair to rely upon a device that can both be defeated as well as mislead based upon less than objective data.

Thankfully I learned firsthand through a partner when there was nothing at stake. Imagine if the same results had been proffered when the stakes were high in terms of one's career or liberty.

[Hambo]

These days, you could learn a lot more from a candidate's social media that you ever could from a poly.

[HCountyGuy]

Has anyone ever walked in to one of these polys and told the person administering that you know the test is a essentially a charade?

[Chuteur]

We don't use them in the UK. I have only ever known of one organisation, a semi-government organisation, use voice stress analysis during "chats with customers" over the telephone. Applicants for roles in the police, military and government are subject to thorough background checks, a battery of interviews and more popular recently is drug testing.

The science and thinking behind polygraphs is a nice idea, BUT, ask to see a batch of empirical data verifying results and they are flumoxed. Add to that the fact that a clever person, fit individual can control their body enough to mess with the readings and they are unreliable. When I did my first hospital stint (military time) learning to stick people with needles and sew up holes we used to wheel a couple of un-used blood pressure monitors into the staff room and hook up whilst eating lunch. It is amazing how easily you can control your blood pressure and pulse with a little practice.

A quick UK policing story: At the Divisional nick (police station) I worked in one of the detectives I knew made a lie detector. He got a box from radio shack, put a bulb on top, mounted some sockets and had wire's trailing out. In the interview room he used to tell suspects that he was going to use a lie detector on them, he would connect up a couple of wires to them and start asking questions, the light would come on if they lied. He would ask the usual simple verification questions of name, address, age and then ask if they had committed the crime. Of course the light would come on when they answered that they had not committed the crime..........because he pushed a switch under the table that turned the light on. He got away with using it for about 4 months before the first suspect mentioned in court that he had been put on a lie detector,........the judge was not happy, nor was the Chief Constable.

In our criminal fraternity they tend to use a power drill through the kneecaps when they want to have a chat with someone.

[PD Sgt.]

Has anyone ever walked in to one of these polys and told the person administering that you know the test is a essentially a charade?

When I took mine for my current agency (20 plus years ago) the (retired officer turned) polygraphist noted my Psych degree and asked what they taught in college about polygraphs. I figured, since I am here to be honest, told him it was basically a pseudoscience somewhat akin to throwing chicken bones on the lid of a 55 gallon drum and there was no empirical evidence that the reactions measured were proof positive of lying.

What followed was a "spirited" 45 minute lecture on the accuracy and efficacy of polygraphs.

I will say, one of the best interviewers I have ever met and been able to talk with was a polygraphist (not the same one as above). But he also realized the primary strength of the machine was not necessarily what it could do, but what the interviewee thought it could detect.

[blues]

16787

[Peally]

I've yet to meet a single individual person who didn't think they were useless bullshit, either on the internet or real life. Not looking forward to taking one if it's ever needed for some reason.

[Chuteur]

I've yet to meet a single individual person who didn't think they were useless bullshit, either on the internet or real life. Not looking forward to taking one if it's ever needed for some reason.

Spoke with a couple of supervisor types from one of the police forces here in the DFW area about polygraphs being used for hiring. Both agreed in replying that they had never seen a polygraph result where the interviewer had written anything other than 'inconclusive' on the submitted report. They also stated that their hiring was never based on polygraph as it was more used to put off applicants with dubious backgrounds than a kosher interview tool.

All you need is a reasonably competent individual who has attended a couple of Saville & Holdsworth* interview courses, has some decent Cop'ly intuition and has been on a micro-tells during interviews course (the liars course).

* = https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Saville_(psychologist)

[AMC]

I'm sure every agency has a version of the fake polygraph story. One of my old Sgts told me that a couple of guys on the night watch had pulled a colander from the kitchen and attached some wires between it and the (then) brand new photo copy machine. They wrote "LIE" on a sheet of paper, stuck the colander on a crooks head, and every time he uttered an untruth, one of them pressed the COPY button. It was a different time.

ETA: it turned out the crook was innocent of that particular crime. Kept trying to be helpful, telling the cops "No, really, man......that thing is busted. You gotta get it fixed!"

[Gadfly]

Took 5 in my time... no faith in them now. I know what I did and did not do in life. And I was told I "sold narcotics" and beat my "wife"... I pointed out I was not married, and never had been... he didn't care.

I was told I failed that test, when I was 100% honest.

Passed at 4 other agencies with the exact same answers...

Had a CI go missing in Mexico. Was worried he was killed. After chasing our tail for two weeks in El Paso, we decided to Poly his daughter to see if she had been in contact with her since going missing. We gave the poly guy a list of 20 questions for her. He told us straight up, "that's not how a poly works, these are too vague". Say what?

So, if you ask someone "have you ever stolen anything", that is a BS question with no way to get a real useful result. If you ask "on January 14, did you take $273 out of the teller drawer, at Bank of America on 8th ave", that is a valid question due to its specific nature.

He said even poly guys know "fishing expediting questions" are BS, only very specific questions have a chance of being valid. Not sure if I buy into that, but it sounds more plausible than "have you ever..." questions.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Gadfly]

Oh, my Daughter took the CBP Poly 3 years ago. 5+ hours. She said she was crying by the end, and felt like she had run a marathon. Said the guy was a total ass, kept calling her a liar. She had to go back and and do part of the test over.

She passed and got the job. But has said she never wants to take a poly again.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[trailrunner]

Oh, my Daughter took the CBP Poly 3 years ago. 5+ hours. She said she was crying by the end, and felt like she had run a marathon. Said the guy was a total ass, kept calling her a liar. She had to go back and and do part of the test over.

She passed and got the job. But has said she never wants to take a poly again.


One of my security managers said the same thing happened to him. He said that he would quit if he had to take it again. I've heard from several people that the current technique now seems to try to intimidate the person being interviewed. Keep telling them they're a liar (just like your daughter), and lots of yelling. I've heard it from enough people that I think it's true. Maybe even they have given up on the truthiness of the poly machine and are resorting to old-school boiler-room interrogation techniques.

When my wife was in college (early 80s) she tried to get a job at a jewelry store at a mall near campus. They gave her a poly test, and she failed. She's an honest person, and said that she answered the questions truthfully. Her friend, who was not the straightest arrow, passed and got the job.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k9Ylu0YywoA

[Chuteur]

When I took mine for my current agency (20 plus years ago) the (retired officer turned) polygraphist noted my Psych degree and asked what they taught in college about polygraphs. I figured, since I am here to be honest, told him it was basically a pseudoscience somewhat akin to throwing chicken bones on the lid of a 55 gallon drum and there was no empirical evidence that the reactions measured were proof positive of lying.

What followed was a "spirited" 45 minute lecture on the accuracy and efficacy of polygraphs.

I will say, one of the best interviewers I have ever met and been able to talk with was a polygraphist (not the same one as above). But he also realized the primary strength of the machine was not necessarily what it could do, but what the interviewee thought it could detect.

Pseudoscience: Good word.

I once turned down a job with an investment bank. After the interviews the personnel girly took me off to a quiet room, put a sheet of blank paper and pen in front of me, then slid over a card with some lines of neatly typed text on it, and asked me to write the text on the paper.

Why?

Oh, it is just a formality, but we send a sample of everyones handwriting to Switzerland for analysis.

Throw the chicken bone's.

I left.

[LSP552]

Polygraphs are useful to get someone to confess when you tell them they are lying, nothing more.

I have personal experience with 2 individuals telling 180 degrees opposite stories during a homicide investigation and both being called truthful a few months apart......by the same examiner. Opposite as in I don't know nothing about the dead dude I was screwing vs she borrowed my gun and came back and said I killed that cheating SOB. I struggled trying to reconcile how both were truthful...insert sarcasm.

I learned a valuable lesson in using them as an elimination/screening tool.

[PD Sgt.]

Pseudoscience: Good word


Thanks, I am pretty sure I stole it from Carl Sagan and the Cosmos series.

I have never used them in my work and it makes me cringe when I hear of other detectives using them as a sole means of elimination.

Quick funny story. I had a guy I had charged out of a shooting volunteer to take a polygraph. This after several elaborate attempts at establishing various alibis had fallen apart. The prosecutor agreed and their office administered the test. When confronted about being deceptive on the questions about shooting someone, the suspect panicked and stammered out he may have shot somebody that day, but not the victim he was charged with shooting.

[blues]

One of the most rewarding aspects of the work back in the day was pulling a confession out of a reluctant to give it up criminal who thought he was clever enough that he could lie and outsmart his interrogator. They never quite proved up to that task and would dig themselves deeper with each false statement and the inability to keep track of the their lies.

Outwitting them and using their own words to break down their stories prevented the use of more traditional lie detection methods...


16813

[Coyotesfan97]

When I took mine for my current agency (20 plus years ago) the (retired officer turned) polygraphist noted my Psych degree and asked what they taught in college about polygraphs. I figured, since I am here to be honest, told him it was basically a pseudoscience somewhat akin to throwing chicken bones on the lid of a 55 gallon drum and there was no empirical evidence that the reactions measured were proof positive of lying.

What followed was a "spirited" 45 minute lecture on the accuracy and efficacy of polygraphs.

I will say, one of the best interviewers I have ever met and been able to talk with was a polygraphist (not the same one as above). But he also realized the primary strength of the machine was not necessarily what it could do, but what the interviewee thought it could detect.

That's how the "machine" is accurate!

I was three and a half hours on the box for my job and the guy running it was a prick. I walked out thinking there's no way I got the job. I've talked with other guys he interrogated for the hiring process and we all have similar stories. He failed a friend who just retired from my agency. He went to another agency, passed their polygraph, got retested, passed, and hired.

[HCountyGuy]

Well I went through their poly, and what a load.

Cliff notes-ish


Arrived promptly, got checked in.

Went over background info (criminal stuff, previous polygraphs). Examiner asked about any questions or concerns. Got somewhat defensive once I mentioned reading recent articles involving CBP's high poly failure. Examiner was insistent on those people obviously not being suited for the agency.

Talked about the science of the polygraph and how it worked. Did a practice run to remind me how it worked. Went on to the actual testing portion. At one point, stopped testing when I swallowed and gave some spill about a voluntary movement and basically I needed to be still.

Short 15 minute break at one point, came back and had questioning more specific to a broader question. After that, testing concluded with examiner informing me that it wasn't looking like I was going to pass. Said I didn't pass a single question they asked in relation to serious crimes, terrorism or contact with foreign nationals. Basically all their questions that weren't directed lies or obvious truths.

Examiner went on to several long stories. Various stories about other applicants who either lied and came clean or were up front about recent issues, some went on and some didn't. Basically trying to integrity check me.

After insisting I had been forthcoming, examiner switched gears and was essentially accusing me of trying to manipulate the test results. Stated they noticed several occasions of me possibly trying to manipulate my results. I would assume these were all points when I swallowed slightly abnormally, based on how my one test abruptly stopped after one such occurrence.

Examiner touched on folks who did research online and had come in trying to utilize techniques they had read/watched in order to cheat the test. Basically if I was doing that and fessed up they could work with me.

Continued to insist I was being forthcoming and was not trying to manipulate my results. Examiner stated my results would be forwarded to their quality control who would review and notify me for possible secondary testing or dismissal from the application process.

Entire process concluded shortly after and I left the facility.

[blues]

Sorry to hear this. As I mentioned earlier in this thread...if anyone can ever have taken a poly under less stressful conditions than having one's partner administer it, I don't know how.

And even though I told him that he could ask me personal questions and I would give completely honest answers, (since it was just for our own use and his calibration), he told me that one or more of my answers appeared to be deceptive. None were, as I couldn't have been more forthright, and I knew then that I'd never willingly take one and have never had to.

Turned out to be a very worthwhile exercise for both of us. (And he was a very experienced polygrapher for both U.S. Customs and ATF prior.)

[TheNewbie]

Uhhhggg. I have my PFT1 in two weeks. I'm not looking forward to this portion.

Where did you take yours?

[Peally]

It really pisses me off that they use this and not more accurate and scientifically sound things like Ouija boards.

[Trooper224]

Did these polygraphists happen to wear twin lightning bolts on their collars? Sounds like they should have.

[blues]

Did these polygraphists happen to wear twin lightning bolts on their collars? Sounds like they should have.

18496

"Is it safe?"

[Trooper224]

18496

"Is it safe?"

Awesome. :)

[Coyotesfan97]

18496

"Is it safe?"

Nice!

[TheNewbie]

Also just because someone passes it does not mean they are good to go. I'm sure plenty of criminals pass them.

I'm an idiot for not putting in pre poly days. I will be honest on mine but sadly that seems to not be what matters.

[rdtompki]

Do candidates take the polygraph before or after an MMPI? If after, does anyone know the MMPI fail rate? (Assuming an MMPI part of the application process)

[TheNewbie]

Do candidates take the polygraph before or after an MMPI? If after, does anyone know the MMPI fail rate? (Assuming an MMPI part of the application process)

I don't think there is an MMPI.

[FRED]

People with TS clearances have failed this test... I don't understand it, other than the test as administered was a knee-jerk reaction to the actual cartel bad guys and gangsters that had made it to the academy... but at least it's out there and people are aware of it. Bottom line, regardless of what stories you hear or how obnoxious the examiner is, if you want the job, just demonstrate poise and composure, don't get defensive or take the bait, and be honest. I heard somewhere that persistence is the most important quality of a BP Agent.

[secondstoryguy]

I have mixed feelings about polys. I've seen good men fail them but they seem to weed out more shitbags than solid dudes. I would say that overall they do more good than harm but it's a shame to see guys fail due to a squirly examiner. I'd add to that (unscientifically) the good guys I know that have failed them seem to be of a nervous fidgety demeanor which I'm sure doesn't look good to examiners that don't know them personally.

One thing I have noticed is that most polygraph techs that I've known seem to have a cushy 9-5 desk job and go to lots of training and seminars. If I had a job like that I'd probably be defensive of its merits too...

[Hambo]

Do candidates take the polygraph before or after an MMPI? If after, does anyone know the MMPI fail rate? (Assuming an MMPI part of the application process)

IME MMPI is part of a battery of psych tests and not a stand alone measure. Also, unless you're bone stupid or batshit crazy it's pretty easy to game the MMPI.

[TheNewbie]

IME MMPI is part of a battery of psych tests and not a stand alone measure. Also, unless you're bone stupid or batshit crazy it's pretty easy to game the MMPI.


If you didn't eat poop or want to have sex with family members, you would have passed the psych test I took to get into the police academy.

[1911nerd]

IME MMPI is part of a battery of psych tests and not a stand alone measure. Also, unless you're bone stupid or batshit crazy it's pretty easy to game the MMPI.

I had an acquaintance ask if anyone ever said "yes" to some of the crazier questions when doing the TS clearance thing. The answer was sort of priceless: "Only rarely, but when they do we're really glad we asked".

[BehindBlueI's]

If you didn't eat poop or want to have sex with family members, you would have passed the psych test I took to get into the police academy.

No questions about fire?
Fire, poop, and your relationship with your mother seemed to be what they were mostly interested in.

[Coyotesfan97]

Do you like tall women?

[TheNewbie]

No questions about fire?
Fire, poop, and your relationship with your mother seemed to be what they were mostly interested in.

Probably! I wonder how many people answer yes to those questions.

[Totem Polar]

Totally OT, but, I once asked a beginning music class "what is the most unusual thing you've eaten for a meal?" (Purely as a momentary concentration break). One guy, dead serious, answered "poop."

Fucking could have heard a pin drop. On carpet.

[TheNewbie]

Totally OT, but, I once asked a beginning music class "what is the most unusual thing you've eaten for a meal?" (Purely as a momentary concentration break). One guy, dead serious, answered "poop."

Fucking could have heard a pin drop. On carpet.


It's PF , everything is off topic while being on topic.

After reading your post the world is a little different for me now.

[BehindBlueI's]

Probably! I wonder how many people answer yes to those questions.

You have to be crazy to fail a psych test...

[blues]

You have to be crazy to fail a psych test...

Unless you outsmart yourself by trying to outsmart the test.

[Malamute]

Do you like tall women?

What is that an indication of?

Or if you also like short women, average height women, redheads, blonds, brunettes, and the modern colors available now? And thin women, thick women, medium women, right handed women, left handed women, and the various physical aspects often commented on seem to cover the spectrum?

Asking for a friend.

[blues]

Do you like tall women?


What is that an indication of?

Or if you also like short women, average height women, redheads, blonds, brunettes, and the modern colors available now? And thin women, thick women, medium women, right handed women, left handed women, and the various physical aspects often commented on seem to cover the spectrum?

Asking for a friend.

Maybe that you shop on Amazon ;)


...I stood high upon a mountain top
Naked to the world
In front of
Every kind of girl
There was long ones, tall ones, short ones, brown ones
Black ones, round ones, big ones, crazy ones...

[Trooper224]

Unless you outsmart yourself by trying to outsmart the test.

I've seen that more often than not.

[blues]

I've seen that more often than not.

Been there, done that (at least once that I can think of). Didn't even get a t-shirt.

[bpack325]

I'm going through the background investigation now, with a poly to be scheduled. Never taken one before, but thought I would have no problems (never tried weed, never even had a speeding ticket), but now I'm concerned. Just knowing it's coming has you second guessing yourself. So the current poly CBP is putting on hasn't changed much in spite of the new, expedited hiring process? Sounds like a plan B would be prudent.

[Hambo]

Unless you outsmart yourself by trying to outsmart the test.

The way it was explained to me (years after I had the job) is that we got a rating 1-5 from the battery of psych tests and the interview with the shrink. If you got a 4 or 5 you were good to go. If you got a 1-2 you were a no-go but weren't necessarily crazy. Maybe they weren't crazy enough to fit the norm that had been established. 3's were questionable, but could get hired. My best friend on the department scored 3, and all the shrink could say was that they knew he lied or tried to game the system, not that he was unsuitable for the job.

When I took the MMPI it was obvious that they asked the same questions over and over. Knowing that consistency was good, I checked back to make sure I answered consistently. I wouldn't recommend trying to outsmart the rest of a psych eval.

[blues]

I'm going through the background investigation now, with a poly to be scheduled. Never taken one before, but thought I would have no problems (never tried weed, never even had a speeding ticket), but now I'm concerned. Just knowing it's coming has you second guessing yourself. So the current poly CBP is putting on hasn't changed much in spite of the new, expedited hiring process? Sounds like a plan B would be prudent.

Don't get yourself worked up as it won't help. Go in, stay as calm as you can and answer the questions truthfully. Don't second guess yourself, chances are you'll be fine.

Wishing you the best.

[HCountyGuy]

I'm going through the background investigation now, with a poly to be scheduled. Never taken one before, but thought I would have no problems (never tried weed, never even had a speeding ticket), but now I'm concerned. Just knowing it's coming has you second guessing yourself. So the current poly CBP is putting on hasn't changed much in spite of the new, expedited hiring process? Sounds like a plan B would be prudent.

A plan B is always prudent, regardless of results.

I highly recommend researching polygraphs some to get an idea of how they work. Of course, be completely honest and forthcoming but don't let your examiner BS you. Stick to your guns if they get accusatory about you lying or trying to "manipulate results", but don't get defensive.

Honestly I believe were it not for my prior experience and knowing how bogus these things essentially are, I would've let my examiner work me up and left feeling like crap.

[psalms144.1]

I'm going through the background investigation now, with a poly to be scheduled. Never taken one before, but thought I would have no problems (never tried weed, never even had a speeding ticket), but now I'm concerned. Just knowing it's coming has you second guessing yourself. So the current poly CBP is putting on hasn't changed much in spite of the new, expedited hiring process? Sounds like a plan B would be prudent.I was a basket case when I walked into my first poly - had freaked myself completely out. I lucked out in getting a GREAT examiner, who say my state, and walked me calmly through the process before even turning the machine on. Once he talked me down off the ledge, it was a breeze.

You have nothing to worry about, sounds like, so try not to obsess...

[bpack325]

Thank you, for a first timer through the process it is a little intimidating - especially with all the press. Still, going to work on that plan B. I'm fortunate enough to have a decent job on hand, but breaking into the federal system appears to have a lot of long term benefits.

[psalms144.1]

...but breaking into the federal system appears to have a lot of long term benefits.Depending on agency and location, pay is good to great. For instance, where I live, I'm paid about 25% LESS than a local counterpart detective, but, were I assigned in, say, anywhere EXCEPT NYistan or maybe LA, I'd be making 2-3 times what my counterparts make. Medical is getting more expensive every year, but there are USUALLY a lot of options to pick from (again, location dependent) so you can offset that cost. The retirement ain't what it used to be, and, if any of this year's budget proposals go through, it's going to get worse. TSP as the "backbone" of retirement sounds great, until you look at how TSP responds to market down-turns...

All in all, Federal LE beats working for a living! Just watch Fox News and you'll know how over paid and underworked we are...

[blues]

TSP as the "backbone" of retirement sounds great, until you look at how TSP responds to market down-turns...

All in all, Federal LE beats working for a living! Just watch Fox News and you'll know how over paid and underworked we are...

I understand your point since I retired under CSRS (having declined the generous offer by Uncle to switch over to FERS in 1984 or so...:rolleyes:)

That said, the TSP and its very low cost indexing options are still quite good as far as self directed plans go. And the "G" fund is a godsend in many respects and is unique in what it offers backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. (which hopefully will still mean something going forward).

[psalms144.1]

That said, the TSP and its very low cost indexing options are still quite good as far as self directed plans go. And the "G" fund is a godsend in many respects and is unique in what it offers backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. (which hopefully will still mean something going forward).Agreed. The problem is when you're nearing retirement (like me), and the market is in an upswing. You DON'T want to move your money into "G" because you'll miss all the potential gains the market is making. But, you're one "bubble" away from your retirement savings taking a major dumper. I lost close to 30% in 2007. When some smart financial folks told me we were headed for another down-turn earlier this decade, I moved everything to "G", then missed about a 12% upswing waiting for the drop. It's enough to drive a man to drink (even a non-drinking panty waist like me!).

I would GLADLY trade my TSP for your CSRS pension percentages...

[blues]

I would GLADLY trade my TSP for your CSRS pension percentages...

I understand. On the positive side, the market has been pretty resilient in that there haven't been any long protracted periods before recovery in several years...but one still has to account for (the possibility of) them in one's "investment policy statement".

CSRS has allowed me to assume a lot less risk in my portfolio.

But, back on topic, I hope that our members here that have to sit through a polygraph examination for a position with DHS or other department, pass with flying colors.

[HCountyGuy]

Got my "official results" today regarding my polygraph.

Nothing I didn't expect, but will admit to being annoyed.


We are contacting you regarding your tentative selection for a Border Patrol Agent position with the Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP).


Your tentative selection notification stated that final offers are contingent upon successful completion of all pre-employment requirements, including a favorable polygraph examination. We have been notified by The Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) that you did not complete a favorable polygraph examination; therefore, your tentative offer of employment has been withdrawn.


The decision to withdraw your tentative offer of employment is final. There is no appeal process.


Polygraph results are valid for up to two years and may be applied to future selections.


If you decide to reapply for a position with CBP, the information found in your polygraph examination may be used by the Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR) for two years.


Failed polygraph results prevent individuals from being eligible for employment for polygraph required positions for two years from the failed polygraph date.

[Mike C]

Got my "official results" today regarding my polygraph.

Nothing I didn't expect, but will admit to being annoyed.

That sucks man. Sorry to hear that, blows that pseudoscience carries so much weight with the hiring process.

[bpack325]

After applying in June 2017, I can unfortunately confirm the practices in the article are still going on. I’ve recently put a combined 14 hours over two sessions in the room, and between the two exams they couldn’t agree on what to fail me on. Questions I breezed through the first time were ones I had apparently failed terribly the second.

I was accused of being a murderer, a drug smuggler, and repeatedly thrown out of the room for somehow attempting to to subvert the test. Not sure how much was bluffing, or what. It definitely was not the truth.

So, after 15 months of waiting, my wife and I giving up our jobs and home to relocate (since I was led to believe it would speed up the process), it’s all over with no recourse, and I don’t know why. I’ve worked at an LE agency in a civilian capacity, and nuclear security for almost 7 years. Never tried weed, never got a speeding ticket. But according to them I’m some kind of monster. I’ve never been treated this way, and now find myself on the other side of the country having to start over. So, for potential applicants, be very aware of the risks of this process.

[HCountyGuy]

After applying in June 2017, I can unfortunately confirm the practices in the article are still going on. I’ve recently put a combined 14 hours over two sessions in the room, and between the two exams they couldn’t agree on what to fail me on. Questions I breezed through the first time were ones I had apparently failed terribly the second.

I was accused of being a murderer, a drug smuggler, and repeatedly thrown out of the room for somehow attempting to to subvert the test. Not sure how much was bluffing, or what. It definitely was not the truth.

So, after 15 months of waiting, my wife and I giving up our jobs and home to relocate (since I was led to believe it would speed up the process), it’s all over with no recourse, and I don’t know why. I’ve worked at an LE agency in a civilian capacity, and nuclear security for almost 7 years. Never tried weed, never got a speeding ticket. But according to them I’m some kind of monster. I’ve never been treated this way, and now find myself on the other side of the country having to start over. So, for potential applicants, be very aware of the risks of this process.

Condolences. It’s almost a lottery on who gets hired it would seem.

Not sure I understand quitting your job though. How were you led to believe it would expedite the hiring process?

[bpack325]

It was insinuated that if I took Nogales as a posting, the process would possibly be expedited. I said that I would, and then a transfer opportunity for my wife opened up out there, so we took a chance and went for it, not expecting this result. Figured if that’s where I’d be, and I had no real reason to fail a polygraph, this would cinch things up. So I left my job and we sold our house to move.

[blues]

I'm terribly sorry to hear of your misfortune in regards to the polygraph. You gave up a lot in an effort to secure a job with the agency.

As I've mentioned in the past, I had one of my old partners, an experienced, certified, and well respected polygrapher, administer the test on me.

(I had no reason to do it other than curiosity, and it helped him keep up his skill level.)

My conditions were that he could ask me direct questions, (none of which could be the basis for my losing the job), and I would answer honestly, (unequivocally), to all. He gave me discretion to lie to one or more questions to make it interesting for him.

At the end of the exam he told me that I had given deceptive answers to a couple of questions which I had answered completely honestly and candidly.

Bottom line? Based upon that experience I don't think I'd have ever voluntarily taken a polygraph going forward.

I hope there will be better opportunities for you on the horizon.

[HCM]

It was insinuated that if I took Nogales as a posting, the process would possibly be expedited. I said that I would, and then a transfer opportunity for my wife opened up out there, so we took a chance and went for it, not expecting this result. Figured if that’s where I’d be, and I had no real reason to fail a polygraph, this would cinch things up. So I left my job and we sold our house to move.

Whom ever advised you sterred you wrong. Polygraph issues aside, until you have a tentative offer of employment with a location in writing, the location (s) you are offered are subject to change based on the needs of the .GOV.

[bpack325]

My former boss, who I applied at the same time with and he’s now working the area, said if you want Nogales you’re gonna get Nogales ;). Basically it was a big gamble, and I lost.

[Screwball]

When I did my polygraph, was happy CBP did one for the two positions I applied for; BPA and CBPO. Did the same with the drug and medical review... but had to do the PT for each (were different, but I’ll talk about that later).

I’m not going to go into specifics on a public forum, but I can agree that it wasn’t something I’d look forward to do again. And I needed to do a follow up polygraph because of the results from the first. Same examiner... who wasn’t a bad guy.

What it came down to, he asked a question where I actually wasn’t sure if I was answering correct (overthinking, yes... but wanted to be honest). I tried to explain, but was after completing the bulk of the examination (both of us were tired and wanted to go home). The protocols in place did “protect” me if it was something between me and the examiner, because I was asked if I’d feel comfortable meeting with him again. Went through review, and was decided to do additional testing.

However, when I went to meet the second time... I explained the situation, and he understood where I was. Worded the question around that situation, which we both agreed I acted in good faith, and there wasn’t an issue. But then he saw issue with something more serious, which was fine on the previous one (or he didn’t say it was an issue when I left the first, or when I got there and he reviewed where we were). It was something that didn’t fit me, but on a subsequent line of questions, he was satisfied with my answer. Told me good luck, and I picked his brain on the testing... because how many polygraph examiners will I ever get to meet?

I understand the idea behind it, and the examiner did explain how the test reacts to the body. Do I think it should be done? Yes, but I don’t think it should be held as a pass/fail decision. If I understand it, it really comes down to the examiner’s opinion/experience, and if they feel comfortable to sign off on the applicant. Do I have a better solution? Nope, as I’m only knowledgeable about the two meetings I had. But I do feel confident in saying the polygraph is costing CBP/BP quality applicants.

I went through the application process with the NJSP, which I ultimately withdrew from. Best decision I made, especially being able to leave this state. However, I feel that their process was a little better in some aspects... and one definitely is PT. They don’t do polygraphs, which I believe is a NJ thing (NCHP does polygraphs, which I learned from talking with a recruiter; pay was my main reason for not pursuing... not the polygraph).

They do their PT first, then the written. Done to reduce the number of applicants, as it is cheaper to do the PT testing than written. But one thing that strikes me with both CBP and BP testing is that it doesn’t mean they get an applicant who is in shape by FLETC... not even close. The first one... it is push-ups, sit-ups, and the step thing for five minutes (can look it up on the associated websites). CBP was supposed to have a lift test, but to be honest... I can’t even remember if I did it.

So, I was brought up with police tests that when you do push-ups/sit-ups/whatever... you bust out as many as possible. It was done at a contracted facility, but was told that you do 10 push-ups... and stop (number might be different, but not an exaggeration). It really had me scratching my head, but probably someone failed and decided to complain/sue.

So, went through the rest of the process... preparing for the second PT (as well as FLETC). You know... running 1.5 mile, push-ups, sit-ups, etc. During the CBPO interview another applicant said the second PT was waved for us. Continued preparing, as I figured BP was going do theirs. When I got my offers without a second PT, I was shocked. I am actually scared to see the applicants at FLETC, because I know human nature. I hope I’m wrong.

When I did the NJSP process, they required us to do a practice PT session. I did as many as I could... especially with the medical issues I was dealing with at that time (they wanted me on an insulin pump... which was a fun transition; I could actually complete them when I was on injections... not on the pump, because of issues with it, that were resolved on my second one). There were people that couldn’t do one rep of push-ups... which I originally thought washed out in the original PT testing. Then you had instructors say that PT test isn’t what they look for... it is the lawmakers coming up with some way of scoring applicants. Doing a 12 minute mile, 50 push-ups and sit-ups in a minute (might have been two... been a long time since I took that test), and good enough score on the relay isn’t going to do much on the first day of the academy.

[Peally]

The fact that polygraphs, literally unverifiable pseudoscience on exactly equal terms with reading chicken bones, are still used for a large number of jobs in this country is frankly incredibly embarrassing.

[Duelist]

After applying in June 2017, I can unfortunately confirm the practices in the article are still going on. I’ve recently put a combined 14 hours over two sessions in the room, and between the two exams they couldn’t agree on what to fail me on. Questions I breezed through the first time were ones I had apparently failed terribly the second.

I was accused of being a murderer, a drug smuggler, and repeatedly thrown out of the room for somehow attempting to to subvert the test. Not sure how much was bluffing, or what. It definitely was not the truth.

So, after 15 months of waiting, my wife and I giving up our jobs and home to relocate (since I was led to believe it would speed up the process), it’s all over with no recourse, and I don’t know why. I’ve worked at an LE agency in a civilian capacity, and nuclear security for almost 7 years. Never tried weed, never got a speeding ticket. But according to them I’m some kind of monster. I’ve never been treated this way, and now find myself on the other side of the country having to start over. So, for potential applicants, be very aware of the risks of this process.

Wow. Hit me up with a pm if you want to chat about SE Arizona employment.

[TGS]

Let this be a cautionary tale for anyone reading this pursuing federal LE:

You never, ever, make a major life change (quitting your job, moving, etc) until you've got the final offer of employment unless you've got a solid backup. You especially don't do it if you haven't at least completed whatever hoops they require you to jump through after receiving the COE....for my agency, that being a your TS clearance and a Class 1 Worldwide Availability medical exam that tests for shit so rare most doctors haven't seen written on paper since medical school. That alone can take a significant amount of time for people; it took me about 4 months which is exceptionally fast. One of my classmates took 2 years for his security clearance.

Even conditional offers of employment can lead to nothing. I had my COE for 9 months before I got my final, and even then a good portion of people with COEs simply time-off the list for my agency before they get a final.

Very sorry to hear, bpack35. I wish you the best of luck with the change and sincerely hope that it isn't stressing your family too much.


Wow. Hit me up with a pm if you want to chat about SE Arizona employment.

This forum is awesome.

[blues]

This forum is awesome.

https://res.cloudinary.com/teepublic/image/private/s--PxZ3-P1_--/t_Preview/b_rgb:fffffe,c_limit,f_jpg,h_630,q_90,w_630/v1500313423/production/designs/1745088_1.jpg

[bpack325]

Wow. Hit me up with a pm if you want to chat about SE Arizona employment.

PM sent, and thank you!

[bpack325]

Let this be a cautionary tale for anyone reading this pursuing federal LE:

You never, ever, make a major life change (quitting your job, moving, etc) until you've got the final offer of employment unless you've got a solid backup. You especially don't do it if you haven't at least completed whatever hoops they require you to jump through after receiving the COE....for my agency, that being a your TS clearance and a Class 1 Worldwide Availability medical exam that tests for shit so rare most doctors haven't seen written on paper since medical school. That alone can take a significant amount of time for people; it took me about 4 months which is exceptionally fast. One of my classmates took 2 years for his security clearance.

Even conditional offers of employment can lead to nothing. I had my COE for 9 months before I got my final, and even then a good portion of people with COEs simply time-off the list for my agency before they get a final.

Very sorry to hear, bpack35. I wish you the best of luck with the change and sincerely hope that it isn't stressing your family too much.



This forum is awesome.

Yes this forum is indeed awesome. At the time my wife and I made the call to take a leap, I'd completed everything except for polygraph/piss test. I'd seen three coworkers leave for BP/Customs and make it through, and knowing them I figured if they made it I must have been reading way too much into the horror stories. The wife had a transfer opportunity open up which would have put us in the sweet spot to live for the area, passing on that we thought would really complicate things later.

I'd been waiting to have my polygraph scheduled in NY for about 8 months at the time. My then job was getting worse by the minute and more personnel cuts were looming. She had a job in hand, I was very close to the end, and everyone rallied around me saying I had this thing and not to worry. It was a gamble, no doubt about it. Interestingly, within 24 hours of requesting to take the poly in AZ I had an appointment.

We lost that gamble, and I accept that it's my responsibility we find ourselves here. Now I'm going to have to fix it, which as far as "oh shit plan B" plans go, looks like going back to school and breaking into a new field. I'm assuming this negative polygraph will follow me, as other LE agencies in the area ask what agencies you've applied to and if you've taken a poly as part of their background invest. If I couldn't pass this one, I don't have a ton of confidence it'd work out differently at a different agency.

I can only speak to my limited, uneducated experience with this, but the polygraph was not a truth test but a physiological test. Weird graph = automatic deception. The examiners spent a lot of time fishing around all the big topics trying to figure out what I was hiding, but at the end my whole life story was on their notepad and there was nothing to give. To them, my reactions could only be the result of deception, which to me was nonsense, but there's no way to right that ship that I saw. I liken it to bright people who are bad at tests. It's not a mark against their intelligence, but a flaw in the structure/implementation of the test itself. I feel that the polygraph affected me similarly, in that I did follow their instructions and was truthful but a failure just the same. I tend to internalize things, and its a family trait to have a negative self image at times. Maybe that came back to bite me on the test, maybe I'm a guy who doesn't react well to that kind of questioning, I doubt I'll ever know.

Hindsight being what it is, I for sure would have listened to the what if fairy and done things differently. I'm partly venting and also putting my story out there for aspiring applicants to be very careful and not to put all the eggs in the CBP basket. I still think it would've been a great career and would encourage people to try if they have the interest, just know it's a flawed system that may not reward you even if you've done everything they've asked.

[TGS]

I'm assuming this negative polygraph will follow me, as other LE agencies in the area ask what agencies you've applied to and if you've taken a poly as part of their background invest. If I couldn't pass this one, I don't have a ton of confidence it'd work out differently at a different agency.

Unless you were actually hiding something this is absolutely not the case.

Polys are actually pretty rare for LE hiring, and even then other agencies may not (should not) take another agency's poly as an absolute on its own since they were not part of the process and can not speak to the validity.

So if LE is what you want, then you have to keep at it. There's metric shit tons of qualified applicants that CBP has been illegitimately failing on polys, and lots of people trying to get into LE have to make second, third or fourth attempts as it is.

[RJflyer]

I do not mean to derail this thread and if that's deemed to be the case, I sincerely apologize...

I'm a local LEO currently in the early stages of the hiring process with a Fed LE agency. I've taken two polys in the past: one for my old Intel community job and another for my current LE job. Passed both with no issues. With that being said, I've heard the horror stories about qualified applicants for Federal LE jobs getting the boot for "failed" polys. I'm happy with where I'm at in my current agency and can see myself having a fulfilling career as a LEO here. However, I want to pursue Federal LE as an opportunity while I'm still relatively young.

My concern is this: I recently read a proposal for updating my state's standards for "Giglio" violations...the language in this proposal is extremely ambiguous, but the overall intent seems to be making the standards more restrictive. Caveat: I'm not a crooked LEO and I don't want to work with dishonest cops, period. However, reading this list of updates makes me nervous. It explicitly states that a failed polygraph could be grounds for getting a current, sworn LEO on the Giglio list.

As stated earlier, I haven't had any issues passing prior polygraph exams. If I were to be DQ'd from the Fed LE hiring process for something in my control, I wouldn't complain. I'd simply stay with my current agency and be happy. But my concern is that I get a bogus poly failure from a Fed LE agency and report it to my current employer, which under the newly proposed standards could label me a Giglio officer and torpedo my career. Is this a legitimate concern? Are LEOs in other states seeing a similar push to make the list of Giglio violations more restrictive (or ambiguous)?

[DocGKR]

There is NO hard science behind polygraphy. It does NOT offer repeatable results when performed by multiple independent researchers. It is utterly invalid.

As noted by a physician colleague with extensive experience: "Valid scientific tests do not depend on the skill of the test administrator. From cholesterol tests to the the MMPI, standardized tests are validated to remove test administrator skill as a variable. Polygraphy does not come close to meeting the definition of a standardized test, and deserves no such consideration. As John Furedy of the University of Toronto aptly put it, polygraphs are not "tests." They are "unstandardizable interrogatory interviews." It should come as no surprise, as every major advance in the field was promulgated by an interrogator, not a scientist. Second, no polygraph operator has demonstrated the ability to detect lies at better than chance (read: coin flip) in a peer reviewed study conducted under field conditions. That's right. Not a single one of these motherfuckers. Additional training and/or practice does not improve results when the entire thing is an invalid discipline. As my dear friend Drew Richardson was fond of saying, "the field as a whole is incompetent." He also stated "polygraph operators are involved in lie detection to the same extent that those who jump from tall buildings are involved in flying."

Watch this: https://antipolygraph.org/hearings/senate-judiciary-1997/richardson-statement.shtml

[HCM]

I do not mean to derail this thread and if that's deemed to be the case, I sincerely apologize...

I'm a local LEO currently in the early stages of the hiring process with a Fed LE agency. I've taken two polys in the past: one for my old Intel community job and another for my current LE job. Passed both with no issues. With that being said, I've heard the horror stories about qualified applicants for Federal LE jobs getting the boot for "failed" polys. I'm happy with where I'm at in my current agency and can see myself having a fulfilling career as a LEO here. However, I want to pursue Federal LE as an opportunity while I'm still relatively young.

My concern is this: I recently read a proposal for updating my state's standards for "Giglio" violations...the language in this proposal is extremely ambiguous, but the overall intent seems to be making the standards more restrictive. Caveat: I'm not a crooked LEO and I don't want to work with dishonest cops, period. However, reading this list of updates makes me nervous. It explicitly states that a failed polygraph could be grounds for getting a current, sworn LEO on the Giglio list.

As stated earlier, I haven't had any issues passing prior polygraph exams. If I were to be DQ'd from the Fed LE hiring process for something in my control, I wouldn't complain. I'd simply stay with my current agency and be happy. But my concern is that I get a bogus poly failure from a Fed LE agency and report it to my current employer, which under the newly proposed standards could label me a Giglio officer and torpedo my career. Is this a legitimate concern? Are LEOs in other states seeing a similar push to make the list of Giglio violations more restrictive (or ambiguous)?

Check with your local prosecutors or city / county / state attorney - however, Polygraphs are not admissible in court so why would a poly be admissible as Giglio material.

[TGS]

I do not mean to derail this thread and if that's deemed to be the case, I sincerely apologize...

That's fucked up if they're going to Giglio you for failing a pre-employment poly.

I think that's definitely something you should talk to your union or whatever sort of group represents you (like us Feds have FLEOA). I would include 1) The statute/guidelines, 2) The link or other evidence such as DocGKR mentioned, and 3) A news article about how many people are flunking the CBP polys.

My initial thought was the same as HCMs.....how can they Giglio you for something that is strictly not admissible in court? Maybe one of our resident lawyers can speak more to that.

FWIW, RJflyer, most federal LE positions do not require a poly for pre-employment so I wouldn't let that state Giglio thing deter you....keep your searches and resume active on USAjobs.gov ;)

[LSP552]

As I've mentioned in the past, I had one of my old partners, an experienced, certified, and well respected polygrapher, administer the test on me.

(I had no reason to do it other than curiosity, and it helped him keep up his skill level.)

My conditions were that he could ask me direct questions, (none of which could be the basis for my losing the job), and I would answer honestly, (unequivocally), to all. He gave me discretion to lie to one or more questions to make it interesting for him.

At the end of the exam he told me that I had given deceptive answers to a couple of questions which I had answered completely honestly and candidly.

Bottom line? Based upon that experience I don't think I'd have ever voluntarily taken a polygraph going forward.



I worked a homicide once where the same polygraph examiner called two different people truthful when they were telling wildly different stories. It was a strange case, and LSP came in after much had been done wrong at the crime scene and with basically no physical evidence. The tests were conducted about a yr apart IIRC.

They have use as a tool to get people to confess, but that’s about it. Chicken bones would probably do as well in determining “truth”.

[Hambo]

They have use as a tool to get people to confess, but that’s about it. Chicken bones would probably do as well in determining “truth”.

Just like Bunk's copier, only less accurate:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rN7pkFNEg5c



I'm guessing that's the point in pre-employment as well: to get someone to say something they would not otherwise. However, if you do a thorough background investigation there shouldn't be anything you don't know about the candidate.

[Poconnor]

I took two polygraphs back in the 90s as part of preemployment background checks for two local deptmemts. I passed both. The first test was administered by a true believer. He was a detective who spent most of his time giving polys to suspects. He was an asshole to put it nicely. The second department’s detective asked me hundreds of questions prior to the test. I asked the second detective questions and I never forgot what he said, “it is a useful tool; it supplements but it does not take the place of a good background investigation”sic. I question the leadership any agency that depends on these tests

[LSP552]

After applying in June 2017, I can unfortunately confirm the practices in the article are still going on. I’ve recently put a combined 14 hours over two sessions in the room, and between the two exams they couldn’t agree on what to fail me on. Questions I breezed through the first time were ones I had apparently failed terribly the second.

I was accused of being a murderer, a drug smuggler, and repeatedly thrown out of the room for somehow attempting to to subvert the test. Not sure how much was bluffing, or what. It definitely was not the truth.

So, after 15 months of waiting, my wife and I giving up our jobs and home to relocate (since I was led to believe it would speed up the process), it’s all over with no recourse, and I don’t know why. I’ve worked at an LE agency in a civilian capacity, and nuclear security for almost 7 years. Never tried weed, never got a speeding ticket. But according to them I’m some kind of monster. I’ve never been treated this way, and now find myself on the other side of the country having to start over. So, for potential applicants, be very aware of the risks of this process.

Sorry to see this. Hope for the best for you and the family!

[Coyotesfan97]

I took two polygraphs back in the 90s as part of preemployment background checks for two local deptmemts. I passed both. The first test was administered by a true believer. He was a detective who spent most of his time giving polys to suspects. He was an asshole to put it nicely. The second department’s detective asked me hundreds of questions prior to the test. I asked the second detective questions and I never forgot what he said, “it is a useful tool; it supplements but it does not take the place of a good background investigation”sic. I question the leadership any agency that depends on these tests

I think I already posted about my three and a half hour ordeal on my poly. The guy who gave it was a true believer too.

One of my long time co workers got polygraphed by the same guy. He failed that test. He tested with the State Troopers and passed. Our hiring Sergeant found out and had him retested. He passed and got hired shortly before me. I despise polygraphs. There a tool to get people to confess.

[BlueDog2009]

Honestly, I think the days of polygraph should be behind us. It's abused by some departments to remove people from testing. I believe the state of Michigan doesn't allow it anymore and I don't see them having issues with hiring crap people as officers. It punishes honest folks more often than not it seems.

[Notorious E.O.C.]

As a mild aside, how common is it for LE agencies to put non-sworn personnel through a poly exam as part of the hiring process? My current employer inflicted one on me as the final stage of the process, after my phone interview, panel interview, and chief's interview, and while they were still working on my background investigation.

[BlueDog2009]

As a mild aside, how common is it for LE agencies to put non-sworn personnel through a poly exam as part of the hiring process? My current employer inflicted one on me as the final stage of the process, after my phone interview, panel interview, and chief's interview, and while they were still working on my background investigation.

Not uncommon at all. At least where I am at. Depends on the agency, though.

[mtnbkr]

As a mild aside, how common is it for LE agencies to put non-sworn personnel through a poly exam as part of the hiring process? My current employer inflicted one on me as the final stage of the process, after my phone interview, panel interview, and chief's interview, and while they were still working on my background investigation.

I've seen it as a condition of employment for non-sworn IT jobs (IE support, not cyber crimes) with local law enforcement in different parts of Virginia.

Chris

[KeeFus]

Polygraphs or CVSA’S are a part of our process and occurs as part of the background investigation...and I have zero faith in them. A solid background investigation will reveal who is, and is not, a good applicant.

[xmanhockey7]

Good to know. Been going through the process. Still early and no idea when or if I’ll even get to do the polygraph. Not particularly looking forward to it after reading this though.

[Gadfly]

I say, keep applying. It took me over 2 years of applying at well over a dozen agencies to get picked up. I “failed” my first poly, the passed 4 others (giving the same answers on all tests).

As far as doing any major life change pre employment... don’t. I had two offers of employment at different times. Houston police sent me a letter saying “congratulations, you are hired”. I gave two weeks notice to quit my job. A few weeks after the offer, I got another letter saying I was now “un selected” and was additionally “barred for life” from re applying. WTF?!?

I went to the recruiting office and got a generic “we don’t discuss that” from the front desk. But I was not leaving. So I finally get the guy who wrote my rejection to talk to me. He closes the door, says he will NEVER confirm or repeat this, but The city police had been sued for having something like 87% white officers in a city that was only 60% white. So no more white male applicants for a while, so he had to get rid of some applicants.

I asked about the “barred for life” horse shit. He said the only thing he could find to bounce me on was, I had left a question blank on one of my forms. Apparently, on one of about 50 questioners, I left “have you ever smoked pot” blank. I pointed out that I had tried pot my junior year of high school, took a drag and coughed for 30 min, and hated it. I admitted it in the background check, admitted it in the psych test, admitted it in my pre screen piss test, admitted it in my poly.... he concurred that I had. But on the fine print of that form, it said an “omission is the same as a lie”, and a lie on the application meant “barred for life”.... He said that was the only thing he could find to remove me for was that one blank spot on one form. He apologized, and said he would deny we had that conversation.

So I got to go back to my boss and beg to keep my old job.

A few month later, Pasadena Tx Police sent me a “congratulations, you are hired” letter. Again, my wife and family celebrated for me. Again I gave two weeks notice at my job. And again, came “oops, we changed our mind” letter. This time, the pill was still hard to swallow, but nothing to do with me. City Council approved the hiring of 15 new officers. So the city tested, and ploy’ed, and PT’ed applicants to get 15 job offers out. Well, this took close to a year, and after that year the city decided they could only afford 10 new officers, not 15. After ranking the hundreds of applicants, I was number 12 out on the list. The top 10 got jobs, the other 5 of us were told sorry, we love you, try agin next year.

So I went back to beg for my old job yet again.

Eventually it all worked out and I got a great job. But persistence was the key. Keep trying. And do not quit your old job (or move cross country) until you are sure your new job is set in stone!

If your heart is set on doing the job, it costs you nothing but time and hope to keep applying.


Sent from my iPhone
(So Excuse the typos)

[blues]

Eventually it all worked out and I got a great job. But persistence was the key. Keep trying. And do not quit your old job (or move cross country) until you are sure your new job is set in stone!

If your heart is set on doing the job, it costs you nothing but time and hope to keep applying.

Well said, brother. I took either three or four voluntary reductions in grade over the course of a career to end up getting the job I wanted, in the place I wanted, with the agency I wanted.

(I had pay retention for the most part but it kept me from getting promoted above the prior (higher) grade for at least a year in each case, and ended up costing me money over the long haul. That said, if you want something strongly enough, you have to be willing to make some sacrifices to attain it. I've never regretted making those decisions.)

[psalms144.1]

Well said, brother. I took either three or four voluntary reductions in grade over the course of a career to end up getting the job I wanted, in the place I wanted, with the agency I wanted. Heck, I volunteered to take a pay cut from a mid-grade GS14 gig to a GS12 gig to try to get on with an agency I wanted to work for, in a location I wanted to live. Money isn't everything!

[blues]

Heck, I volunteered to take a pay cut from a mid-grade GS14 gig to a GS12 gig to try to get on with an agency I wanted to work for, in a location I wanted to live. Money isn't everything!

I knew we were friends for a reason. :cool:

[Jim Watson]

So I got to go back to my boss and beg to keep my old job.

Not the same situation, but my (non-LE) agency had a guy who was a standing joke for taking another job and crawling back.
Once he stayed gone a year, once he was back the next week, and various intervals in between. He eventually selected the bird in hand and stuck it out to retirement.

[HCM]

Well said, brother. I took either three or four voluntary reductions in grade over the course of a career to end up getting the job I wanted, in the place I wanted, with the agency I wanted.

(I had pay retention for the most part but it kept me from getting promoted above the prior (higher) grade for at least a year in each case, and ended up costing me money over the long haul. That said, if you want something strongly enough, you have to be willing to make some sacrifices to attain it. I've never regretted making those decisions.)

I've done two voluntary reductions in grade to get jobs I wanted and one to get a location I wanted.

[jetfire]

On the polygraph front, I’ve had three and I’m 2-1 pass-fail on them. The most recent one was the last one I did, and it was the grueling test that others have experienced here. I was applying for a transfer in my department at the time, and the detective who administered the test said there were “artifacts” in my test; mind you this was after I’d been sitting in a chair for four hours going over every last detail of my life trying to remember if I’d accidentally killed anyone and forgotten about it.

Oh and for those wondering, the state of Minnesota doesn’t require a polygraph for LE jobs.

[psalms144.1]

...the detective who administered the test said there were “artifacts” in my test;Ah, "ARTIFACTS," yes... The last poly I took (and the only one of SEVEN I've had that was administered by my own agency) I spent 6+ hours in the chair, in a t-shirt, directly under an AC vent, starting at about 1130. And, the examiner couldn't get past the "artifacts." When he started using the Reid Technique on me, I told him to go f*ck himself, and left.

Next day, another examiner ran me through the test, same questions, in and out in about 45 minutes with no drama. And, I swore that would be the last polygraph I ever took. 15 years later, I'm still going strong!

[Baldanders]

Why are we still using a test that has been thoroughly debunked to screen for anything? Inertia?

[blues]

Why are we still using a test that has been thoroughly debunked to screen for anything? Inertia?

That's a very reasonable question with probably few satisfying answers.

(From an agency perspective it's a great way to rid yourself of a candidate you're looking to be shut of, rightly or wrongly.)

[psalms144.1]

Why are we still using a test that has been thoroughly debunked to screen for anything? Inertia?Because, to polygraphers and polygraph believers, the test IS a scientific and reliable system. Just like folks who blindly believe the .45 Auto will kill people just from blast overpressure at the muzzle, believers will NEVER give up their ties to this system. And, frankly, since the FBI uses it for hiring practices, the "bar" is pre-set...

[blues]

Because, to polygraphers and polygraph believers, the test IS a scientific and reliable system. Just like folks who blindly believe the .45 Auto will kill people just from blast overpressure at the muzzle, believers will NEVER give up their ties to this system. And, frankly, since the FBI uses it for hiring practices, the "bar" is pre-set...

And let's face it, chicken guts can be messy. You don't want to spill them on your nice oxford shirt and wingtips. ;)

[Baldanders]

That's a very reasonable question with probably few satisfying answers.

(From an agency perspective it's a great way to rid yourself of a candidate you're looking to be shut of, rightly or wrongly.)


Between you and Psalms, I think I'm "satisfied", in that your answers cover organizational political pragmatism and confirmation bias as the causes. Sounds about right.

In the other sense of "satisfying," yeah, not so much.

[randyho]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lasso_of_Truth

It's an interesting read for anyone who's been on the receiving end. First time I saw this was a remarkably ygtbfkm moment.

[sierra 223]

I have zero faith in a polygraph

[blues]

I have zero faith in a polygraph

And with good reason (https://pistol-forum.com/showthread.php?23895-2-3-Border-Patrol-job-applicants-fail-polygraph-test-making-hiring-difficult&p=551667&viewfull=1#post551667), imho and experience.

If I could be deemed deceptive when the examination was conducted by a friend and partner who performed the test at my request on a machine he calibrated...what might happen under less ideal circumstance when one's answers might actually be of consequence?

For me, it was simply a lark and a curiosity to see how it felt and what it would make out of completely honest replies but for the ones where I was told to be deceptive intentionally.

Yeah...no.

[Caballoflaco]

I found this on the dept of justice website regarding polygraphs:

“Consequently, the government continues to have several good arguments for excluding polygraph evidence. First, a prosecutor can still attack the reliability of polygraph evidence both generally and as administered in the case at hand. The FBI polygraph unit has provided affidavits and live testimony in several district courts to rebut a defendant's proffer that his polygraph results are reliable, and stands ready to assist any prosecutor confronted with such a motion to introduce polygraph results.”

The FBI polygraph unit will testify in court that polygraphs are unreliable and shouldn’t be admissible in court as evidence.

Why is has this “scientology” not been relegated to the same realm as phrenology in popular use?


Quote is from here: https://www.justice.gov/jm/criminal-resource-manual-262-polygraphs-introduction-trial

[willie]

I have observed that the pt is one way to get l.e. applicants to confess to prior and current drug use. If I tell the examiner in an interview that I have snorted cocaine no more than 50 times, then the test itself no longer matters. Ditto for frequency of marijuana use. I have been excluded. A good friend is a retired l.e. pt examiner. He told me three things. He would not take one. Results had low reliability. But if he could subject a person to an 8 hr examination, his results would be more reliable.

I worked with juvenile sex offenders, all of whom were given pt's to validate therapy progress. Questions pertained to fantasies like sex with the family members that they abused. I pointed out to the director that most of his employees could not pass a fantasy test when one considers how many of them had been caught screwing the kids. He said I was negative.

[CWM11B]

Two take away from this thread for me:

1. My previous (and long held belief) that the polygraph is right up there with tarot cards, ouija boards, runes, and the magic eight ball is validated.

2. If the BP truly treats applicants in this manner, I'm glad I never aspired, much less applied, to the agency.

[bpack325]

I've actually met more people in the southern AZ area that had theirs go almost identically like mine - long adversarial first session where you're accused of murder, 2nd session where you're called a drug smuggler, and boom you're out. Killed my LE dream and got me into PTA school. Think I'll have a longer, more enjoyable career doing that instead.

[BehindBlueI's]

I've actually met more people in the southern AZ area that had theirs go almost identically like mine - long adversarial first session where you're accused of murder, 2nd session where you're called a drug smuggler, and boom you're out. Killed my LE dream and got me into PTA school. Think I'll have a longer, more enjoyable career doing that instead.

I've no idea what PTA school is, but if you really had a "LE dream" BP is far from the only game in town and most places aren't playing those games. It's hard enough to get quality candidates in the door without doing mind-game buttfuckery to run them off.

If the "dream" was more of a whim, enjoy whatever PTA school is and I wish you the best. If it's a legit dream, plenty of options out there.

[Vista461]

I have zero faith in a polygraph

Same.
I would never apply at a place that uses a polygraph, not because I’m not truthful, but because I wouldn’t want to be blackballed because of being at the mercy of the poly and it’s operator possibility screwing up. Not worth it.

[HCountyGuy]

Same.
I would never apply at a place that uses a polygraph, not because I’m not truthful, but because I wouldn’t want to be blackballed because of being at the mercy of the poly and it’s operator possibility screwing up. Not worth it.

Most agencies seem to use it, though I’ve gone through one dept’s hiring process that used CVSA.

[Vista461]

Most agencies seem to use it, though I’ve gone through one dept’s hiring process that used CVSA.

I only know of one in my area, and I didn’t apply there back when I was still looking. Lucky for me I guess. Lol.

[ChaseN]

I've no idea what PTA school is, but if you really had a "LE dream" BP is far from the only game in town and most places aren't playing those games. It's hard enough to get quality candidates in the door without doing mind-game buttfuckery to run them off.

If the "dream" was more of a whim, enjoy whatever PTA school is and I wish you the best. If it's a legit dream, plenty of options out there.

IDK where you work, but here in the mid-atlantic, getting DQ'd in a police hiring process for "lying" to a police officer during a polygraph session is a one way ticket to never getting a job. EVERY department I'm aware of in VA/DC/MD requires that you list every other department you've ever applied to, and the results of said process. If you were DQ'd for anything more than a parking ticket, you're as good as on a black list.

It's a crooked process IMO. When I got hired by my first department I first had to explain away why I was not hired by a tiny adjacent agency with a terrible starting salary. They would not believe that I self-selected out after learning the starting salary on my ride-along ($43k, which is poverty status in Northern Virginia and ~$12k lower than any surrounding jurisdiction) and treated me like a criminal despite the fact that I voluntarily withdrew. Only after a special-purpose polygraph session covering the reason I wasn't hired at that other agency, and THEN my background detective contacting them to confirm (they did), was I cleared for hire. So yeah, I believe that (regionally) his LE dream could be crushed.

[blues]

^^^^That is one sad ass story. It sickens me to read it ChaseN.

[BehindBlueI's]

IDK where you work, but here in the mid-atlantic, getting DQ'd in a police hiring process for "lying" to a police officer during a polygraph session is a one way ticket to never getting a job. EVERY department I'm aware of in VA/DC/MD requires that you list every other department you've ever applied to, and the results of said process. If you were DQ'd for anything more than a parking ticket, you're as good as on a black list.

It's a crooked process IMO. When I got hired by my first department I first had to explain away why I was not hired by a tiny adjacent agency with a terrible starting salary. They would not believe that I self-selected out after learning the starting salary on my ride-along ($43k, which is poverty status in Northern Virginia and ~$12k lower than any surrounding jurisdiction) and treated me like a criminal despite the fact that I voluntarily withdrew. Only after a special-purpose polygraph session covering the reason I wasn't hired at that other agency, and THEN my background detective contacting them to confirm (they did), was I cleared for hire. So yeah, I believe that (regionally) his LE dream could be crushed.

You have to list them here as well, but getting punted from a process after a conditional offer is only supposed to affect you for 2 years and that's if it was our process. I know of an instance on another department where an individual failed the poly for a non-sworn position and passed THE SAME POLY for a sworn position and was eventually offered the sworn position.

I definitely get policing is regional. If you're 36 or over and not already sworn, your options here are very very limited. 100 miles south, no age limits at all as long as you can pass the physical. If you're flexible and willing to move, there are opportunities out there.

[FNFAN]

IME MMPI is part of a battery of psych tests and not a stand alone measure. Also, unless you're bone stupid or batshit crazy it's pretty easy to game the MMPI.

That's easy to say if the people following you haven't seen your spirit leave your body!:p

[Borderland]

How does the pay scale at CBP compare with other agencies in CA, AZ, NM and TX?

I have no experience in LE but I've been all over the southern border (AZ,NM) in some remote areas. That has to be some pretty undesirable duty in the summer months, especially in the bush.

I've read that the benefits aren't that great either, but I don't know that either for a fact.

I wouldn't want that job unless there were some incentives like better pay or benefits. A tan and good Mexican food wouldn't be enough. Probably why so many people leave after a few years.

[FNFAN]

I'm going through the background investigation now, with a poly to be scheduled. Never taken one before, but thought I would have no problems (never tried weed, never even had a speeding ticket), but now I'm concerned. Just knowing it's coming has you second guessing yourself. So the current poly CBP is putting on hasn't changed much in spite of the new, expedited hiring process? Sounds like a plan B would be prudent.

It's a great tool for loading stress during an interview, but my suggestion is to go into it with no preconceptions and no reservations looking at it as a new experience. Don't heap the stress on yourself just going through the interviewer's door. If you don't understand a question ask and keep a positive attitude. Don't be concerned, be candid.

[Screwball]

How does the pay scale at CBP compare with other agencies in CA, AZ, NM and TX?

Can’t speak for southern border CBP, but DFW airport guys are “well paid,” according to a classmate from the area. Might be able to get more from other fields, but he felt he got into a good place with this.

We have a few going to Laredo, San Ysidro, and some other well known spots. Never asked them about specifics with pay, but you should be able to find pay scales online.

One thing, most southern border positions offer decent pay incentives. Unsure if they are still doing it, but a 33% incentive paid upon hiring, and same payment for the following two anniversaries of hiring (doesn’t increase over time, same 33% of first year salary is paid for the other two). Have to stay at the port for 3 years... or pay it all back. Some unpopular northern ports had 25%... which is what I signed up for.

If you get sent down south for TDY... it is a decent pay. One of our instructors was breaking it down for us, and was actually a decent chunk of change. If I had the option... I wouldn’t want to go. But if my number is drawn, I’ll make the best of it.

[HCM]

How does the pay scale at CBP compare with other agencies in CA, AZ, NM and TX?

I have no experience in LE but I've been all over the southern border (AZ,NM) in some remote areas. That has to be some pretty undesirable duty in the summer months, especially in the bush.

I've read that the benefits aren't that great either, but I don't know that either for a fact.

I wouldn't want that job unless there were some incentives like better pay or benefits. A tan and good Mexican food wouldn't be enough. Probably why so many people leave after a few years.

CBPOs and BPAs make good money, better than most state or local LEOs in border areas. The only state/locals on the border making CBP journeyman money might be San Diego /CHP.

CBP gets the same benefits package as all other federal workers.

The reasons many leave after a few years is NOT pay or benefits.

Some take CBP/BP jobs as a stepping stone to more desirable jobs in Federal LE, I’ve worked with many ICE, ATF, DEA and FBI agents who are former Border Patrol Agents.

However, by far the majority who leave after a few years do so due to cultural or quality of life issues in border communities. Sometimes it is a matter of being in a remote area with limited access to jobs for spouses, schools, medical care etc. In many cases you have people not from the border regions who don’t understand that culturally it is more Mexico than anything else. Some learn it and come to love it and some, well, no pos ta cabron.

When I say culturally it’s like Mexico I’m not talking about ordering in Spanish at McDonald’s. I’m talking about the way people relate and go about their daily business. It’s not bad but if you are a Guero from, say the Northeast, or Midwest, it is a culture shock.

[Borderland]

CBPOs and BPAs make good money, better than most state or local LEOs in border areas. The only state/locals on the border making CBP journeyman money might be San Diego /CHP.

CBP gets the same benefits package as all other federal workers.

The reasons many leave after a few years is NOT pay or benefits.

Some take CBP/BP jobs as a stepping stone to more desirable jobs in Federal LE, I’ve worked with many ICE, ATF, DEA and FBI agents who are former Border Patrol Agents.

However, by far the majority who leave after a few years do so due to cultural or quality of life issues in border communities. Sometimes it is a matter of being in a remote area with limited access to jobs for spouses, schools, medical care etc. In many cases you have people not from the border regions who don’t understand that culturally it is more Mexico than anything else. Some learn it and come to love it and some, well, no pos ta cabron.

When I say culturally it’s like Mexico I’m not talking about ordering in Spanish at McDonald’s. I’m talking about the way people relate and go about their daily business. It’s not bad but if you are a Guero from, say the Northeast, or Midwest, it is a culture shock.

Culture shock for sure. I can relate to a lot of this. I've been in Sonora, Chihuahua and Baja. Mostly tourist destinations but some out of the way places also. I used to fish a lot near La Paz. I graduated from a HS that was 75% Hispanic. I'm not Hispanic but culturally I'm probably more Hispanic (Mexican) than anything else. That's hard for most that know me to believe but it's a fact and I recognize it.

Great post. Thanks for the insight.

[TCB]

How does the pay scale at CBP compare with other agencies in CA, AZ, NM and TX?

I have no experience in LE but I've been all over the southern border (AZ,NM) in some remote areas. That has to be some pretty undesirable duty in the summer months, especially in the bush.

I've read that the benefits aren't that great either, but I don't know that either for a fact.

I wouldn't want that job unless there were some incentives like better pay or benefits. A tan and good Mexican food wouldn't be enough. Probably why so many people leave after a few years.

We are non-competitive to GS-12, have Federal retirement benefits (TSP w the Service matching 5%) and very competitive health care plans to choose from. If you start at a GS-5 you can be making 6 figures in approx 6 years. All of this information is readily available...but please, tell me about how shitty we have it.

[Borderland]

We are non-competitive to GS-12, have Federal retirement benefits (TSP w the Service matching 5%) and very competitive health care plans to choose from. If you start at a GS-5 you can be making 6 figures in approx 6 years. All of this information is readily available...but please, tell me about how shitty we have it.

I guess you have to decide for yourself if the duty is worth the pay and benefits. I don't walk in your shoes everyday so that would be impossible for me to say. Some people think a career in the military is a good deal so I guess it's more or less up to the individual to make that call.

The extreme heat in S AZ wouldn't be a desirable part of that job for me. I lived down there long enough to know about that. 113 degrees in Yuma today, but it's a dry heat.;)

[TGS]

I guess you have to decide for yourself if the duty is worth the pay and benefits. I don't walk in your shoes everyday so that would be impossible for me to say. Some people think a career in the military is a good deal so I guess it's more or less up to the individual to make that call.

The extreme heat in S AZ wouldn't be a desirable part of that job for me. I lived down there long enough to know about that. 113 degrees in Yuma today, but it's a dry heat.;)

All of the agents I personally know who've left the Border Patrol have left because of 1) Bad management, and 2) Lack of career ladder/options.

Even after getting dicked on their AUO, the pay and benefits were the only thing that kept them for as long as they stayed, not what drove them away.

[blues]

All of the agents I personally know who've left the Border Patrol have left because of 1) Bad management, and 2) Lack of career ladder/options.

Even after getting dicked on their AUO, the pay and benefits were the only thing that kept them for as long as they stayed, not what drove them away.

I left my first job in federal law enforcement for the reasons mentioned above.

The bonus was not only that I had a much better and fulfilling job once I lateraled over...but I took a flyer for a whopping $25 and joined a FLEOA class action lawsuit for violations of FLSA...and years later, having forgotten about it, was rewarded with a series of significant payouts resulting from the lawsuit. My partner hadn't thought it worthwhile at the time and lived to regret the decision.

Sometimes you end up making a good decision while having a few beers...

[Duelist]

I guess you have to decide for yourself if the duty is worth the pay and benefits. I don't walk in your shoes everyday so that would be impossible for me to say. Some people think a career in the military is a good deal so I guess it's more or less up to the individual to make that call.

The extreme heat in S AZ wouldn't be a desirable part of that job for me. I lived down there long enough to know about that. 113 degrees in Yuma today, but it's a dry heat.;)

Yuma’s pretty hot, but there are lots of miles on that border, and some of them are really nice.

[Borderland]

Yuma’s pretty hot, but there are lots of miles on that border, and some of them are really nice.

Roger that.

[Grouse870]

Well I got a provisional pass on my polygraph today. It still has to go to QC for the official pass. I wonder if it has changed recently as I have nothing negative to say. The examiner was very professional and pleasant. This is my second poly that I have taken (one for my current agency).

[rojocorsa]

Not that I have any exams coming up,

but in the event I did in the future...


How is one supposed to do a polygraph test knowing full well they're bullshit and dumb and inadmissible in many courts (and keep a straight face?)

[Le Français]

Not that I have any exams coming up,

but in the event I did in the future...


How is one supposed to do a polygraph test knowing full well they're bullshit and dumb and inadmissible in many courts (and keep a straight face?)

Do you want the job? If so, let that motivate you to keep a “straight face”.

[rojocorsa]

Do you want the job? If so, let that motivate you to keep a “straight face”.

That would be my plan. I understand it's just another step.

The last time I sat on a board, they conducted the board after the poly exam. And the first order of business was to discuss how I did on said poly. One of the officers opened up with this line about how these exams were 100% accurate and scientific, etc. Then they asked if I agreed. Being younger and less mature and extremely nervous at the time, I went along with it despite knowing they were dubious and both inadmissible in TX and fed court.

Should I be asked about something like this again I'll have no choice but to be honest and tell the truth.

[Alpha Sierra]

100% layman's question: what's the point of using a test whose results are so unreliable that it can't be used as evidence in court?

[WobblyPossum]

My take based on having taken a couple during hiring process’ and having witnessed a few more as part of the job: People who believe the test is accurate and scientific may admit to things that they otherwise might have lied about. A polygraph isn’t about the machine. It’s an interview. The polygrapher should, ideally, be an excellent interviewer. The box is just a tool.

[blues]

My take based on having taken a couple during hiring process’ and having witnessed a few more as part of the job: People who believe the test is accurate and scientific may admit to things that they otherwise might have lied about. A polygraph isn’t about the machine. It’s an interview. The polygrapher should, ideally, be an excellent interviewer. The box is just a tool.

Spot on, Dan. I've seen guys who wouldn't know what to do with a nugget that they came upon. Others that knew exactly where to go from there. It's not the machine, it's the dynamic of the interview.

[Alpha Sierra]

My take based on having taken a couple during hiring process’ and having witnessed a few more as part of the job: People who believe the test is accurate and scientific may admit to things that they otherwise might have lied about. A polygraph isn’t about the machine. It’s an interview. The polygrapher should, ideally, be an excellent interviewer. The box is just a tool.

Thank you. That makes sense.

[Screwball]

We had a guy admit to being suicidal in the last batch of polygraphs... so I guess they “work.”

[kwb377]

Sometimes "failing" a pre-employment polygraph is a blessing.

In early '93 I had just taken the Personnel Board test and was put on the county-wide list for hire. I was called in for an interview with the local S.O's office. One of the questions during the polygraph was, "Have you ever taken, possessed, sold or given away any illegal drugs or substances?". I answered "No" (because I hadn't). After the poly, the interviewer said I had a "reaction" to that question and began grilling me further..."C'mon...everybody's done it at some point." I reiterated that I hadn't. I never got a call back from them.

About a month later I got a call from a local suburban department. They asked the same question, I gave the same answer, and nothing was ever mentioned about it. I got the job a week later...making a lot better money and didn't have to work the jail for 5 years before going to patrol.

[fastreb]

From the reading I've done, polygraph results aren't admissible in court because they aren't reliable. Until they are, using a polygraph for any reason is foolish. Having undergone a couple myself, I just wish that employers would have one of their HR people sitting in on the sessions. If they did, I think that companies would stop using them pretty quick because some of the questions can be completely inappropriate.

[JJN]

Not that I have any exams coming up,

but in the event I did in the future...


How is one supposed to do a polygraph test knowing full well they're bullshit and dumb and inadmissible in many courts (and keep a straight face?)

Not a polygraph examiner, but I was trained on the theory in conjunction with the PCASS, a sort of lay polygraph we used on Afghans, Iraqis, and TCNs in the Army. As a side note, I'm pretty convinced the PCASS was not any more reliable than chance, but it did give an interesting inject vector for other intelligence. Much of the whole thing was about security theater, which is true for the poly as well. Of course, not everyone involved in security theater knows they are playing a role.

Polygraph examiners who take polygraph tests do so in a "directed lie" format. As a comment above hinted at; polygraphs compared a probable lie with a relevant question. In the case of saying that you have never used an illegal substance, that was probably structured as a control question with the relevant question being something like "have you used illegal drugs in the last year." A 100% candid person cannot "pass" a standard poly, and must use a directed lie.

Jon

[JATA]

Polys are complete and utter bullshit.

Just remember, you can cheat on your wife your entire life and that's not a disqualifier, but if you smoked weed 20 years ago you're an obvious liar and you are lower than dogshit.

I have taken two poly's and two VSA's. I could not agree with your first statement any more completely. There is a reason they are not admissable in court.

[arcticlightfighter]

Been a cop for almost 20 years, lateralling to Washington state...apparently all LE agencies utilize polys for pre employment screening.

No discipline in my 30 years of LE and military but some subjective BS poly examiner may undermine my chances at getting hired doesnt encourage me

As has been echoed here, the older one is and the more real world experience the more likely to be viewed as evasive

Great....