Worker Rights Under the EPPA

Harassment, discrimination, and retaliation in thethe discretion of the presiding judge. Though
workplace can occur in many different ways.decisions to allow these tests has been strongly
Some forms of harassment may be disguised ascriticized by academics and appellate courts alike,
seemingly permissible actions, which are eitherthe US Supreme Court has yet to issue a
unethical or illegal under further examination. Andefinitive ruling on the topic.
angry employer, for example, may attempt toProvision of the EPPA
force an employee to submit to polygraph or lieUnder the EPPA, most private employers are
detector tests in an effort to discredit his or herbarred from forcing employees or prospective
claim of harassment or discrimination at work.employees to submit to lie detector and/or
The Employee Polygraph Protection Act (EPPA) ofpolygraph tests, with certain exceptions, which
1988 is a federal statute which shields employeesinclude:
from frivolous, retaliatory, or overzealous abuse- Investigation of incidents such as theft, where
of lie detector and polygraph technology.the employee is under reasonable suspicion and
Admissibility and Controversyhad access to the property in question;
In addition to providing a bulwark against the- Interviewing of prospective employees for
misuse of this technology, the EPPA is also asecurity firms engaged in protecting health and
legislative recognition of the fact that the use ofsafety operations, national currency, and/or
such tests is highly controversial in the justicenational security;
system, and that no scientific consensus exists- Interviewing of prospective employees for
about the reliability of polygraph results.pharmaceutical and similar companies who have
Some advocates, for example, claim thatdirect access to controlled substances.
polygraphs have up to 95% accuracy, while criticsIf these exceptions do not apply, employers are
put estimates as low as 65%. The credibility ofalso forbidden by law from asking about the
results has also been called into question byresults of a lie detector test taken by the
several high profile cases in which lie detectorsemployee or applicant, using the results of a lie
failed to serve their purpose.detector test as the basis for hiring, firing, or
Because of ongoing controversy, the admissibilitychanging the employment status of an employee,
of lie detector tests in court varies fromor retaliate against an employee for claiming
jurisdiction from jurisdiction and is often left up toprotection under the EPPA.