VelvetJones

John Oliver did an interesting piece on the Border Patrol and the problems with many of it's new hires in recent years. It confirms a lot of the suspicions that many of us have about the training and quality of candidates that make their way in the DHS ranks. While I don't care for Oliver's political rants or views, this does bring up an important issue.


http://www.businessinsider.com/john-...tonight-2017-8

TWA884

VelvetJones

The scariest statistic is that after they reinstated the polygraph requirement, 50% of the applicants that had passed the comprehensive background check then failed the polygraph. That seems alarmingly high. I'd be curious what the numbers are for other Federal LEO positions.

petaluma1

Does TSA polygraph its applicants? If not, they should.

Boggie Dog

If they did there would be no TSA.

chollie

I'd be curious, too. CBP pulled in a lot of <deleted> during their last massive hiring push, so I believe caution is in order this time. Polygraphs have never been an exact science and applicants should be able to challenge or appeal the results.

I wonder if the polygraphs are being substituted for more costly and intensive background checks.

Boggie Dog

Believe I read a piece recently where CBP wants to lower the hiring standards of CBP employees. May have already happened.

Just a few links that show the problems within DHS/CBP. I have no reason to believe things are any different today and that would include all of DHS.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/28/u...er-bribes.html

The Enemy Within: Bribes Bore a Hole in the U.S. Border


http://www.themonitor.com/news/local...9bb30f31a.html

Former McAllen DHS internal affairs head, agent, indicted in conspiracy


https://www.texasobserver.org/homela...border-patrol/

Want to run drugs, smuggle migrants and get away with it?
Join America’s biggest law enforcement agency.

FliesWay2Much

If done correctly, a polygraph (CI or lifestyle) augments the background investigation. I lot of people, even rough & tumble customs agents, get spooked by all the technology and spill their guts. It's not the actual machine but a good examiner will start asking questions to get to the root cause of a "deception indicated (DI)" result. They do this for every single question that comes back as "DI". The value in the polygraph is the on-the-record Q&A that happens when trying to resolve a DI. So, all things considered, I'm not surprised at all about this statistic. "Failing" a polygraph means that one or more response remains DI.

Those who have a TS/SCI clearance are subject to a polygraph but are not routinely examined.

See above. There are all the usual appeals if somebody gets their clearance pulled. Also, remember that anything you say to the examiner, while hooked up and when off-line, is admissible and is recorded.

WillCAD

I saw this piece and was surprised at the balance in the reporting. He eviscerated the lowered hiring standards and abbreviated training of the post-9/11 surge, while still remaining respectful of agents who do their job well, the agency itself, and it's mission.

CBP's TV spots and NASCAR sponsorship are in the same league - but with much more sophistication and higher budgets - as TSA's ads on pizza boxes and gas pumps.

Well then they really, really should.