Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Scientist Organizes Resistance To Polygraphs

Posted by kdawson on from the drugs-lies-and-security-clearances dept.

George Maschke writes "Brad Holian, a senior scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory, is using a blog to organize resistance to plans for random polygraph and drug testing of Lab scientists. Holian writes: 'Polygraphy is an insulting affront to scientists, since a committee of the National Academy of Sciences has declared that, beyond being inadmissible in court, there is no scientific basis for polygraphs. In my opinion, by agreeing to be polygraphed, one thereby seriously jeopardizes his or her claim to being a scientist, which is presumably the principal reason for employment for many scientists at Los Alamos.'"

6 of 405 comments (clear)

  1. Polygraphs ... by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I guess I can understand polygraphy IF it's at all accurate. After all, they are dealing with dangerous (from a proliferation standpoint) materials and experiments critical to national security. As for drug testing, I think it should only happen if an employee is exhibiting other problems at work, if then. And it also depends what drug is being tested for. Is there any evidence that enjoying the occasional herbal treat harms work performance in any material way?

    -b.

  2. Richard Feynmann by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I read his memoirs in high school. If half of what he claims that he did is true, I suspect that he'd have lasted about a day in the Los Alamos of today. Damn shame, really. A lot of the brightest people like to play with different consciousness states as well as being inveterate pranksters.

    Cheers,
    -b.

  3. What a genius idea by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 4, Interesting
    From the DOE:
    I. Introduction

            DOE's existing counterintelligence polygraph regulations are set
    forth at 10 CFR part 709. Under section 3152(a) of the National Defense
    Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2002, Pub. L. 107-107 (NDAA for FY
    2002), DOE is obligated to prescribe revised regulations for a new
    counterintelligence polygraph program the stated purpose of which is
    ``* * * to minimize the potential for release or disclosure of
    classified data, materials, or information'' (42 U.S.C. 7383h-1(a).)
    Section 3152(b) requires DOE to ``* * * take into account the results
    of the Polygraph Review,'' which is defined by section 3152 (e) to mean
    ``* * * the review of the Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence
    on the Polygraph of the National Academy of Sciences'' (42 U.S.C.
    7383h-1(b), (e)).

    So they attached this to one of those emergency defense appropriation bills:
    SEC. 3152. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY COUNTERINTELLIGENCE POLYGRAPH PROGRAM.

    (a) NEW COUNTERINTELLIGENCE POLYGRAPH PROGRAM REQUIRED.-The Secretary of Energy shall carry out, under regulations prescribed under this section, a new counterintelligence polygraph program for the Department of Energy. The purpose of the new program is to minimize the potential for release or disclosure of classified data, materials, or information.

    (b) AUTHORITIES AND LIMITATIONS.-(1) The Secretary shall prescribe regulations for the new counterintelligence polygraph program required by subsection (a) in accordance with the provisions of subchapter II of

    chapter 5 of title 5, United States Code (commonly referred to as the Administrative Procedures Act).

    (2) In prescribing regulations for the new program, the Secretary shall take into account the results of the Polygraph Review.

    (3) Not later than six months after obtaining the results of the Polygraph Review, the Secretary shall issue a notice of proposed rulemaking for the new program.

    (c) REPEAL OF EXISTING POLYGRAPH PROGRAM.-Effective 30 days after the Secretary submits to the congressional defense committees the Secretarys certification that the final rule for the new counterintelligence

    polygraph program required by subsection (a) has been fully implemented, section 3154 of the Department of Energy Facilities Safeguards, Security, and Counterintelligence Enhancement Act of 1999 (subtitle D of title XXI of Public Law 106-65; 42 U.S.C. 7383h) is repealed.

    (d) REPORT ON FURTHER ENHANCEMENT OF PERSONNEL SECURITY PROGRAM.-(1) Not later than January 1, 2003, the Administrator for Nuclear Security shall submit to Congress a report setting forth the recommendations of the Administrator for any legislative action that the Administrator considers appropriate in order to enhance the personnel security program of the Department of Energy.

    (2) Any recommendations under paragraph (1) regarding the use of polygraphs shall take into account the results of the Polygraph Review.

    (e) POLYGRAPH REVIEW DEFINED.-In this section, the term "Polygraph Review" means the review of the Committee to Review the Scientific Evidence on the Polygraph of the National Academy of Sciences.

    Your Congress at work.
  4. How intereresting if they were 100% acccurate by Marrow · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Considering the "brainscan" approach to polygraphs that the future may hold. I am kind of interested in
    how a 100% accurate polygraph or lie-detector would affect civilization. How it would affect law enforcement
    and judiciary. How would it affect business agreements and politics. If a really good lie detector were
    readily available, then what would it do to society, government, economies, education, religion...

    Its fun to imagine how the world would reshape itself. Would it be good, or a disaster.

  5. Re:Polygraphs work--sorta by thestuckmud · · Score: 3, Interesting
    What gives with Los Alamos? Instead of coddling their bullpen of 2000 watt minds they seem insistent on beating them into submission.
    I have to agree. Having worked in a highly secure yet reasonably managed environment, the respect accorded to staff members made me feel more secure than any level of invasive physical or psychological measures could. Treating people like criminals can encourage them to act that way.

    By the way, I recently found this site of polygraph criticisms.
  6. Unionize by jimhill · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Quite simply, LANL employees' biggest problem is that we aren't unionized. We stand idly by and watch management (LANS/NNSA/DOE) hammer us again and again and again with policies that decrease the quality of workplace life (without adding jack to the real safety and security of the institution). The "substantially equivalent" requirement for benefits between the last contractor and the current contractor has been revealed to be a stinking pile of bullshit. With a strong collective bargaining agreement, there'd be some pushback against this unrelenting spiral into hell. There is none, however, because nearly everyone in Los Alamos County believes that unions are dues-sucking liberal plots that exist solely to protect the slackers and lackwits. Efforts to unionize have been and will continue to be fruitless. And so, things will get worse.

    To specifically address the current outrage, Director Mike Anastasio's plan to expand random drug testing, one can say that it's true that LANL has had far, far too many security and safety incidents over the past decade. But I can't think of a single one in which the cause was traced back to drug use or alcohol overconsumption. This means we'll be spending money that the contractor doesn't have (they're facing a $150M + shortfall this year) to solve a problem that the lab doesn't have, and raping the Fourth Amendment in the process. (Yes, I know the workplace drug laws have been routinely upheld, but when the courts write that some things are too important for Constitutional protections to apply, what're you to think?) THIS is the kind of visionary thinking that made LANS the winning contractor?

    /Pee in cups for LANL

    //Take polygraphs for LANL

    ///Hates self for it

    --
    Learn to spell: nickel, missile, lose, solely, amendment, speech, kernel, probably, ridiculous, deity, hierarchy, versus