9/9/99
Re: Docket No. CN-RM-99-POLY
Proposed Polygraph Examination Regulation
Sirs,
These comments concern the basic philosophy behind the proposed
rule, and not any one specific paragraph in it. This proposal
is, in its entirety, misguided, ill-conceived, and counterproductive.
It is inspired by a knee-jerk political response, and is going
to cause more problems than it solves.
It presumes guilt on the part of many long-term, faithful DOE
employees, and it requires them to submit to a somewhat humiliating
experience in order to prove their innocence.
Were this a requirement for new-hires, it would be somewhat more
tolerable; at least the person would have the choice of pursuing
a career elsewhere. For a person such as myself, who has been
a contractor at a national laboratory for a number of years, and
has a great amount of energy and effort invested in their career,
there is little choice. In reality, refusal to take the
test means you lose your job. So far I have had to undergo a medical
and psychological examination, give periodic urine samples to
continually prove my innocence with regards to drug use, and now
I am being told I must submit to a polygraph to again prove my
innocence.
I realize that basic citizen's rights are often disregarded in
the name of national security, but this time the DOE has gone
too far. This is a blatant case of our being considered guilty
until we prove our innocence. At the polygraph technical presentation
at SNL (9/7/99), the gentlemen heading the polygraph program stated
that they do not see it that way at all. This amazes me; I think
the gentlemen need to get in touch with the reality of the situation.
I have seen definite signs that many DOE workers are insulted
and demoralized by this proposed rule. It is engendering a very
unhealthy atmosphere of fear, suspicion, and mistrust. If you
continue with this plan, you are going to lose a lot of good people,
and demoralize most of the rest.
Sincerely,
Robert Clancy
11 B Blue Crow Ln.
Sandia Park, NM 87047
| http://www.spse.org/ |