tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post113474777336625464..comments2024-03-25T20:06:39.794-05:00Comments on Grits for Breakfast: I wouldn't qualify for this jobGritsforbreakfasthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10152152869466958902noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-1135780896664397702005-12-28T08:41:00.000-06:002005-12-28T08:41:00.000-06:00markm,the answer is "yes". And, police department...markm,<BR/><BR/>the answer is "yes". And, police department interviews are as silly as the polygraph.<BR/><BR/>The issue is that departments have yet to acknowledge that the polygraph is a poor tool for selecting employees. My guess (yeah, i haven't done the research but I'd love to see it) is that agencies with extreme hiring qualifications have about the same ratio of "problem children" as do agencies without.<BR/><BR/>In 1997 I sat through a law enforcement "new supervisors" course, and we had three different police department chiefs come in for an intense Q&A (medium and small sized agencies...veteran chiefs). They all agreed that regardless of their scrutinization of applicants, they ended up with about the same problems from about the same amount of people.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-1134912036090304472005-12-18T07:20:00.000-06:002005-12-18T07:20:00.000-06:00I think he refers to the fact that most law enforc...I think he refers to the fact that most law enforcement agencies ask on their candidate applications whether you've ever used drugs, and many exclude you if you answer yes. Since about 100 million US adults have smoked pot sometime in their lives, that excludes a huge number of potential applicants who would otherwise do a fine job. <BR/><BR/>Assuming that's the argument, it's analagous to a company that only hires male executives, complains there are few good candidates, but by policy has excluded half the qualified applicants.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-1134882631632365082005-12-17T23:10:00.000-06:002005-12-17T23:10:00.000-06:00The previous commenter wrote:"It's about drug use ...The previous commenter wrote:<BR/>"It's about drug use and good applicants who lie; say they only experimented; then flunk a polygraph on the use questions."<BR/><BR/>Are you saying that most of the good applicants are hardcore drug users who pass the drug screen, but flunk the polygraph? <BR/><BR/>Generally speaking, I'd believe a good applicant over a polygraph any day.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8597101.post-1134753978312716452005-12-16T11:26:00.000-06:002005-12-16T11:26:00.000-06:00don't buy this bull from someone who knows what th...don't buy this bull from someone who knows what the difficulties are.<BR/><BR/>The FBI and every other federal,state and local law enforcement agency is having the same problem. <BR/><BR/>It's not about qualifications or other agencies recruiting. It's about drug use and good applicants who lie; say they only experimented; then flunk a polygraph on the use questions. <BR/><BR/>This unusual predicament is only going to get worse because the pool of non-drug users is almost non-existent. <BR/><BR/>The drug use questions are on every federal, state, and local police application. Most good applicants don't apply out of fear and the application process actually encourages deception.<BR/><BR/>The pool of applicants for everyone in law enforcement is small but it's not because of agency competition.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com