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.Here's a good question: What is the proper way to administer a famously inaccurate test?
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.Not the fault of the test, then. Perhaps the Craig's List item wasn't clear that the Border Patrol wants honest applicants and so they have been flooded with dishonest, even criminal applicants. An honesty mistake, one might say.
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.
Republican Sen. Jeff Flake of Arizona said he suspects CBP examiners fail applicants to justify their own jobs. He said he worries applicants are being wrongly branded with a "scarlet letter" in the eyes of other potential government employers.While the idea that polygraph examiners are failing two-thirds of CBP applicants in order to keep their own jobs is intriguing, I am more interested in Senator Flake's recognition that a polygraph falsely labeling the applicant as a liar will make it nearly impossible for that person to be hired by other government agencies.
Kerlikowske explained that CBP isn't getting the applicants it wants because the relatively new agency, created in 2003, "doesn't have a brand" and is unfamiliar to some.Sure, that must be it. The fault lies with the applicants who are unaware that a nearly 14-year-old federal agency charged with enforcing federal laws is looking for honest applicants.
Among other possible reasons offered by some experts for the agency's failure rate: CBP may have higher standards than local departments, and it gets less-experienced applicants who have never taken a lie detector before.Does that mean that taking a previous lie detector test makes a person more likely to pass? How is that possible if the test does what we are told it does?
Relying on an unreliable test to determine the accuracy of one's answers seems a little nuts.
Defending the polygraph by blaming the applicants seems even nuttier.
1 comment:
I applied for a CBP Officer position a couple of years ago. Hauling my wife and kids to a more remote location appealed to us. I am, and was at the time of applying, a Police Officer. I served honorably in the Army and was deployed to Iraq for a year for Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. I have four sons and would never do anything that would shame them. None of this ultimately matters though. I ended up sitting through the polygraph. I was not worried. I'm not perfect. There are a couple things that I disclosed but nothing that excluded me from my current employment. The examiner told me I was lying. I was in disbelief. I've never been called a liar before. I was angry. The Office of Professional Responsibility (i find now to be a very ironic name) emailed me that I was not suitable for employment with CBP. I've never been more livid in my life. There is no recourse, it truly is the Scarlet Letter for someone like me. At least if I give someone a citation or jail someone they can fight it if they believe my actions to be wrong. My family, my work.....the embarrassment. If I wasn't so driven to move forward I could see how that stigma could ruin someone. As I type, I am angry again. Apparently I'm not "what they are looking for". What a terribly elitist and unamerican statement from someone who's supposed to protect the Americans that he seems to despise. Angry that this pseudo science is still relied on so heavily and perpetuated by the ruling elite in our premier law enforcement agencies. I hope to see the polygraph one day take a back seat to other hiring methods. I fear though that it is now too engrained and too much money and influence flows with this program. Thank you for your article.
Post a Comment