Lie Detector Legality

What is the name of your state? California
Can an employer dismiss you if you refuse to take a lie detector test?

My response:

Yes. And, it doesn't even have to be as the result of your refusal, either. California is an "At-Will" employment State. Therefore, your employer can fire you because he says to you, one morning, "You know, I don't like the pants you wore yesterday. You're fired."

IAAL

IAAL, I may have to disagree with you, at least to the extent that I advise the poster to get further information.

There is a federal law, the Employee Polygraph Protection Act (EPPA) that applies, plus CA may have it's own version of this law (my State does.) The information I have on the EPPA is very brief and doesn't give any specifics so drtate, I suggest you do some research. And since it really would be amazing if CA didn't have their own version of the EPPA, I suggest you call CA's Labor Board and inquire about that as well.

IAAL:

"California Labor Code §432.2, prohibits a private employer from demanding or requiring any employee or applicant for employment to submit to or take a polygraph, lie detector, or similar test or examination as a condition of employment or continued employment. This California law restriction, however, does not apply to federal government, state government or local government employees. An employer may not request an employee to take such a test without first advising the employee in writing at the time the test is to be administered of their rights guaranteed under Labor Code §432.2.

Under the Federal Employee Polygraph Protection Act of 1988, polygraphs may be used by private employers during investigations involving economic loss or injury to the employer's business, theft, embezzlement, misappropriation, or an act of unlawful industrial espionage or sabotage. Certain conditions are required, including that the tested employee had access to the property that is subject to the investigation; the employer has a reasonable suspicion that the employee was involved in the incident or activity under investigation; and the employer executes a statement provided to the employee before the test that sets forth with particularity the specific activity or incident being investigated and the basis for testing particular employees. The statement must be signed by the employer and retained for at least three years, and must contain an identification of this specific economic loss or injury to the business of the employer; a statement indicating the employee had access to the property that is the subject of the investigation; and a statement describing the employer's reasonable suspicion that the employee was involved in the incident or activity under investigation.

Employees whose rights have been violated through the use of a polygraph may, under certain circumstances, bring legal action within three years and seek reinstatement, promotion, and back pay.



California Labor Code §432.2
(a) No employer shall demand or require any applicant for employment or prospective employment or any employee to submit to or take a polygraph, lie detector or similar test or examination as a condition of employment or continued employment. The prohibition of this section does not apply to the federal government or any agency thereof or the state government or any agency or local subdivision thereof, including, but not limited to, counties, cities and counties, cities, districts, authorities, and agencies.
(b) No employer shall request any person to take such a test, or administer such a test, without first advising the person in writing at the time the test is to be administered of the rights guaranteed by this section. "

My response:

Okay, I may have "jumped the gun" a little too quickly. However, I wasn't completely mistaken either.

Here's the law - -

California Labor Code section 432.2

(a) No employer shall demand or require any applicant for
employment or prospective employment or any employee to submit to or
take a polygraph, lie detector or similar test or examination as a
condition of employment or continued employment. The prohibition of
this section does not apply to the federal government or any agency
thereof or the state government or any agency or local subdivision
thereof, including, but not limited to, counties, cities and
counties, cities, districts, authorities, and agencies.

(b) No employer shall request any person to take such a test, or
administer such a test, without first advising the person in writing
at the time the test is to be administered of the rights guaranteed
by this section.

Employee Polygraph Protection Act (29 USCA § 2001 et seq.), enacted in 1988, generally prohibiting private employers from using lie detector tests for preemployment screening except in some security and pharmaceutical businesses, or during employment except in limited circumstances involving an ongoing theft investigation.
These privacy claims may arise from:
• monitoring and audio/video recording of employees in the workplace;
• monitoring employees' e-mail or use of company computers for personal business;
• searches of computer files;
• searches of an employee's physical person or purse, or workplace lockers, desks and company cars;
• credit checks on applicants and employees;
• psychological testing of applicants and employees;
• disclosure of employee personnel records to third parties;
• mandatory polygraph examinations


Alright, let's assume that the employer says in writing, "Hey, Joe. You won't be fired if you refuse the polygraph test." Then, the employee "refuses" the test after the employer "first advis[es] the person in writing at the time the test is to be administered of the rights guaranteed by this section."

Now, since California is an "At-Will" State, how many reasons can you come up with to fire this employee next week?

So, the law is a hollow law, inviting the employer to come up with any reason s/he wants, or no reason at all. As long as the employer swears that the refusal and the firing are not connected in any manner, then the employer hasn't violated any law.

Bottom Line?

If a California employer want to fire you, you're fired - - and there's nothing you can do to stop it.

IAAL

It is Federal employer, if that narrows the selections. There is a witch hunt by someone with a grudge over an item with no economic value. High likelihood that no one took it, it just isn't there and probably hasn't been for ages. People who worked there years ago could have taken it. Tom says Jane did it, Jane says Sally did it, Sally says Peter did it, and Peter points the finger back at Tom. My concern is that my employment and retirement could be on the line, using a methodology that is barely above randomness. I have a medical condition that causes me to fail. Don't know if it will even be required of me, but I will feel more comfortable if I know it isn't even an issue. I thought Congress banned the use of lie detector tests for all civilian employees, meaning federal civilian employees also, as opposed to say the FBI.

Not quite. They're barred in most cases, but there are exceptions.