Should You Polygraph Your Employees?
Security dealers have the right to do this to employees “engaged in the design, installation, and maintenance of security alarm systems.” Photo is from www.iconocast.com.
Generally unknown to most integration companies, if you are “engaged in the design, installation, and maintenance of security alarm systems” you can require your employees or prospective employees to take a polygraph test, according to federal law.
Specifically, while federal law prohibits private employees from requiring these lie-detector tests, security companies are exempt from that prohibition.
So how much equipment and tools go missing from your trucks every year? Even worse, have plasma TVs, loudspeakers or other components suddenly equipment vanished from a job? This might be a way to investigate a suspect employee.
Of course, it’s risky business with employees to go down this path. But the mere knowledge that you can legally require an employee you suspect is stealing from you to take one of these tests is something to consider or at least inform them.
This tidbit of information comes from Ken Kirschenbaum, Esq. with Kirschenbaum & Kirschenbaum PC, Attorneys at Law in Garden City, N.Y. He has been a leading lawyer in the security field for many years.
“Polygraphing your employees is an issue that comes up from time to time,” he says. “You may want to incorporate that procedure in your interview process or utilize a lie detector as part of a particular investigation. The general rule is that an employer may not require a lie detector test; however, employers in the security alarm business are exempt from the prohibition. Keep in mind that this is federal law and your state may have its own rules.”
According to Wikipedia, lie detector tests cost between $400 and $1,500, depending on the level of questioning and time. New software-based systems that you can purchase for your own computers cost about $6,000, but you can buy older analog detectors for about $1,200.
The specific prohibition law and exemption, is entitled “Prohibitions on lie detector use (29 USCS § 2002 § 2002),” says this:
Except as provided in sections 7 and 8 [29 USCS §§ 2006, 2007], it shall be unlawful for any employer engaged in or affecting commerce or in the production of goods for commerce--
(1) directly or indirectly, to require, request, suggest, or cause any employee or prospective employee to take or submit to any lie detector test;
(2) to use, accept, refer to, or inquire concerning the results of any lie detector test of any employee or prospective employee;
(3) to discharge, discipline, discriminate against in any manner, or deny employment or promotion to, or threaten to take any such action against--
(A) any employee or prospective employee who refuses, declines, or fails to take or submit to any lie detector test, or
(B) any employee or prospective employee on the basis of the results of any lie detector test; or
(4) to discharge, discipline, discriminate against in any manner, or deny employment or promotion to, or threaten to take any such action against, any employee or prospective employee because--
(A) such employee or prospective employee has filed any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted any proceeding under or related to this Act [29 USCS §§ 2001 et seq.],
(B) such employee or prospective employee has testified or is about to testify in any such proceeding, or
(C) of the exercise by such employee or prospective employee, on behalf of such employee or another person, of any right afforded by this Act [29 USCS §§ 2001 et seq.].
29 USCS § 2006
(e) Exemption for security services.
(1) In general. Subject to paragraph (2) and sections 8 and 10 [29 USCS §§ 2007 and 2009], this Act [29 USCS §§ 2001 et seq.] shall not prohibit the use of polygraph tests on prospective employees by any private employer whose primary business purpose consists of providing armored car personnel, personnel engaged in the design, installation, and maintenance of security alarm systems, or other uniformed or plainclothes security personnel and whose function includes protection of--
(A) facilities, materials, or operations having a significant impact on the health or safety of any State or political subdivision thereof, or the national security of the United States, as determined under rules and regulations issued by the Secretary within 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [June 27, 1988], including--
(i) facilities engaged in the production, transmission, or distribution of electric or nuclear power,
(ii) public water supply facilities,
(iii) shipments or storage of radioactive or other toxic waste materials, and
(iv) public transportation, or
(B) currency, negotiable securities, precious commodities or instruments, or proprietary information.
(2) Access. The exemption provided under this subsection shall not apply if the test is administered to a prospective employee who would not be employed to protect facilities, materials, operations, or assets referred to in paragraph (1)
So what do you think about even informing your employees about this? Good idea? Bad idea?
Subscribe to the CE Pro Newsletter
Read more Business Resources stories
People On the Move: Milestone AV, Definitive Technology, JL Audio, NACECEDIA White Paper Examines How to Build Mobile Device Wireless Networks
Why Key Suppliers Are Skipping Trade Shows
Lack of Women Hurting IT Industry
10 Reasons Coax, Not Wireless, Is Future of Video Distribution
More in Business Resources
About the Author

4 Comments (displayed in order by date/time)
Thanks Dave! This will come in handy :D
My pleasure… Matter of fact, the upper management at the time taught all of the top salespeople that trick in order to pass. Antar didn’t want to lose any of his top earners.
GRASSHOPPER: When you can steal a case of Maxell UDLX-II90 Chrome Bias blank cassettes from my hand, it’s time for you to stay.
The answer is no you should not polygraph your employees, because science has shown them to be about as useful as tarot card reading. They are not allowed in courts of law and should not be legal at all because they are useless.
The quality of this old 60 minutes video is horrible, but is enlightening and a fun watch.
https://antipolygraph.org/blog/?p=110



When I worked for Crazy Eddie in 1976, polygraphs were mandatory before you got the job. Even when you had the job, they made you take a polygraph every year. Everyone knew it was against the law back then, but if you refused to take it, they’d find another reason to fire you.
However, I personally didn’t have a problem with it… if you have nothing to hide, who cares? Yet, the technology back then was far from state of the art. Many people lost their jobs because 50% of the results came from the machine, and the other 50% came from the personal feelings of the guy giving the test.
Today, most people “Valium it up” before the test to pass. Other people put a thumb tack in the bottom of one shoe… Every time you answer a question, (which has to be a “yes” or a “no”), by stepping on the tack, the pain or pinch of the tack will register the same body response on every question.