The wrong way to investigate employee theft
February 20, 2009 by Sam NarisiPosted in: Applicant background screening, In this week's e-newsletter, Latest News & Views, Security and law
Ever had to investigate an employee who was suspected of stealing from your company? Here’s one tool the law says you should avoid:
A lie detector test.
In one recent case, an employee was asked to take a polygraph test during an investigation. The results suggested he was lying, and he was fired the next day.
He sued the company for violating the Employee Polygraph Protection Act.
The court let his case move forward. The law’s very explicit about the use of polygraphs at work: Employers aren’t allowed to “require, request, suggest, or cause” any employee or job applicant to take a lie detector test or consider the test’s results when making employment decisions.
Cite: Harmon v. CB Squared Services
View all the Latest StoriesTags: Employee Polygraph Protection Act, lie detector test, polygraph
February 24th, 2009 at 3:56 pm
I’ve taken 3 lie detector tests, lied during them all and passed them all. Even when my restaurant was robbed and the police thought it was an inside job I recommended to the staff that they don’t take one. They can’t be trusted.
February 24th, 2009 at 7:04 pm
Security cameras can be useful for this purpose, but you can’t monitor an employee’s work area… We had a few problems with theft, and worked with HR to validate what the cameras were recording.
Another aspect of this type of problem that’s very hard to digest is that it’s often easier to dismiss the employee rather than terminate them with cause or proceed with a criminal investigation. In my experience, both Legal and HR advise dismissal because you have to have a rock-solid case in order to terminate with cause for theft. Additionally, HR advised that the forensic investigation required to obtain “rock solid” evidence would be too disruptive to the business.
The SECOND time I had to deal with this type of situation, I didn’t bother investigating. I stuck cameras up in the hallway — not recording, not connected to anything. Three days later, I “casually mentioned” to all of the admins that we’ve had cameras in place for 3 days, and we managed to capture a picture of the thief in action, and that we got a really good picture of his face. I told them HR is “working on an airtight approach” and that the thief’s termination and a subsequent criminal investigation was pending.
A day later, the thief resigned — validated by the fact that no further thefts occurred.
I realize that I’m stereotyping the admins as gossips — in this case, the admins happened to be adept at inappropriately sharing information, but there is always a “known gossip” in the office who can inadvertently do your dirty work for you. Just to drive the point home, and virtually ensure they would pass the information along, I looked around and then whispered “don’t tell anyone, but….”.
Rumors can often be more valuable than proof.