Workers dismissed for refusing polygraph test head to Labour Court

schumi

schumi

Honorary Master
Joined
Mar 26, 2010
Messages
25,095
Reaction score
2,032
Location
Durban
Three workers who were dismissed for refusing to take a polygraph test by their employer are heading to the Labour Court next month. The workers are asking the court to set aside a Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) arbitration award, claiming it was “grossly flawed”. The workers also want to be reinstated.
workers-dismissed-refusing-polygraph-test-head-labour-court



The problem for the workers began in January 2018 when the employer, Silveray Stationery Company, noticed stock losses of about R170,000. The company then asked 12 employees to take polygraph tests. This would be used as a “tool to assist investigations” and to “narrow or focus on a potential group or area to conduct investigations,” according to the testimony given during the CCMA arbitration hearing.


Three of the workers had repeatedly refused to take the polygraph tests. After receiving final written warnings, the workers were dismissed for breaching their employment contracts and insubordination.
Click to expand...

More at: https://www.groundup.org.za/article/workers-dismissed-refusing-polygraph-test-head-labour-court/
 
Why refuse, do they have something to hide R170000 stock missing is a big knock for any company. Do you really want to take the chance, what if it was them and another R170000 stock goes "missing". If there is smoke there is usually a fire.
 
Last edited:
I would honestly refuse a polygraph myself even knowing I'm fully innocent. Results are meaningless, could give a false positive that leads to prejudiced further investigation, and I think it's inadmissible in court.
 
Gordon_R said:
Polygraph tests are unscientific (mostly used in the USA and in bad movies). It's bizarre that they would be used in SA, and incredible that refusal to take part could be used as cause for dismissal. Perhaps the CCMA sees reality differently.
Click to expand...
It is not the result of the test, it is the attitude of those that have the test. We have, successfully, used them where we had information of a person / people involved in ongoing theft. The fact that they were interviewed by the tester was enough for them to resign regardless of the results. Some even before the tester comes. Once you let it be know that the interviewer will be asking questions only on a specific subject, the innocent are very happy to comply.
 
Dairyfarmer said:
It is not the result of the test, it is the attitude of those that have the test. We have, successfully, used them where we had information of a person / people involved in ongoing theft. The fact that they were interviewed by the tester was enough for them to resign regardless of the results. Some even before the tester comes. Once you let it be know that the interviewer will be asking questions only on a specific subject, the innocent are very happy to comply.
Click to expand...
Agree there. We used it as a deterent as well where everyone knew what would follow if there was serious theft etc. It also created snitches. Lol. However, the questions have to be event specific. If you are asked 'have you taken company property without permission?' your sub conscious mind immediately refers back to that highlighter you took home for your laaitjies project. And then you are suspended and investigated right there for that CIT robbery.
 
Nirv said:
I would honestly refuse a polygraph myself even knowing I'm fully innocent. Results are meaningless, could give a false positive that leads to prejudiced further investigation, and I think it's inadmissible in court.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I would also refuse a polygraph. I used to be under the impression that they are, when done by subpar examiners, prone to false positives. I always thought that as an employee it would be better for you to refuse one as opposed to have a false indication of deception.

Keen to hear the other MYBBxperts™ views.
 
I have to routinely take polygraphs for my company, it's quite hectic even if you've got nothing to hide it still makes me anxious every time
 
People say that a polygraph test is inaccurate but the CIA and many security agencies including our national intelligence use it .
I was subject to the polygraph test every 5 years for a security clearance , which was part of my conditions of service.
You can not refuse a test if it is part of your conditions of service .
I was never told if i passed or failed .
 
Quicks said:
Why refuse, do they have something to hide R170000 stock missing is a big knock for any company. Do you really want to take the chance, what if it was them and another R170000 stock goes "missing". If there is smoke there is usually a fire.
Click to expand...
They were wise to refuse a farce that is as ridiculous as a witchdoctor throwing the bones and I am glad that Groundup is on their side.

The polygraph is so obviously junk science that a few clicks on Google will tell a person how to beat it. Reading about the polygraph reminds me of the Catholic handbook Malleus Maleficarum which, for several centuries, was used by both Catholic & Protestant witch hunters to identify witches.

The 19 year old daughter of a friend was fired for failing a polygraph test in the early 2000s and the real culprit, who had also been tested, was identified a few months later.

Silveray Stationery Company is part of Bidvest and I would guess that the stock loss is a tiny fraction of the total annual stockholding and turnover. If the loss happened in a short period, it would point to serious deficiencies in their security.
 
Last edited:
nightjar said:
They were wise to refuse a farce that is as ridiculous as a witchdoctor throwing the bones and I am glad that Groundup is on their side.

The polygraph is so obviously junk science that a few clicks on Google will tell a person how to beat it. Reading about the polygraph reminds me of the Catholic handbook Malleus Maleficarum which, for several centuries, was used by both Catholic & Protestant witch hunters to identify witches.

The 19 year old daughters of a friend was fired for failing a polygraph test in the early 2000s and the real culprit, who had also been tested, was identified a few months later.

Silveray Stationery Company is part of Bidvest and I would guess that the stock loss is a tiny fraction of the total annual stockholding and turnover. If the loss happened in a short period, it would point to serious deficiencies in their security.
Click to expand...
Agree. The company will lose this court case.
 
Dairyfarmer said:
It is not the result of the test, it is the attitude of those that have the test. We have, successfully, used them where we had information of a person / people involved in ongoing theft. The fact that they were interviewed by the tester was enough for them to resign regardless of the results. Some even before the tester comes. Once you let it be know that the interviewer will be asking questions only on a specific subject, the innocent are very happy to comply.
Click to expand...
The testers are normally people that have seen and heard it all. They dont even need the polygraph to get results most of the time.
My wife had to have some staff tested at one stage due to theft, the tester picked up right away that one of the people was a psychopath and that the test wouldnt work well with them because they believed they were telling the truth.
 
I worked for a company that got robbed overnight. They brought in investigators (it looked like an inside job as they had one of the 2 keys for the front door) that made us take a polygraph. No one refused but everyone failed the test (probably because they're reflecting on every bad thing they've done in their life). Nothing happened afterwards.
 
Rocket-Boy said:
The testers are normally people that have seen and heard it all. They dont even need the polygraph to get results most of the time.
My wife had to have some staff tested at one stage due to theft, the tester picked up right away that one of the people was a psychopath and that the test wouldnt work well with them because they believed they were telling the truth.
Click to expand...
This is what people who dismiss it as junk science don't understand. It is not what the lines on the paper show but how the person reacts to certain questions and how they react to the whole process. Examiners "read" the whole situation. It is not a case of "the machine says he is not telling the truth therefore he is guilty". The machine is more a phycological tool.
 
Dairyfarmer said:
This is what people who dismiss it as junk science don't understand. It is not what the lines on the paper show but how the person reacts to certain questions and how they react to the whole process. Examiners "read" the whole situation. It is not a case of "the machine says he is not telling the truth therefore he is guilty". The machine is more a phycological tool.
Click to expand...
Yeah, so the moral of my story is just take the test, you'll fail anyway which means nothing.
 
Quicks said:
Why refuse, do they have something to hide R170000 stock missing is a big knock for any company. Do you really want to take the chance, what if it was them and another R170000 stock goes "missing". If there is smoke there is usually a fire.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't take polygraph test either, whether guilty or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X