5 ms·

Maybe it is how it's written, but this person's entire career reads like a rat navigating through a maze built by superiors. Even though they say the job is amo

Maybe it is how it's written, but this person's entire career reads like a rat navigating through a maze built by superiors. Even though they say the job is among the happiest times of their life, it helps put into perspective the follower mentality some have, especially in the public sector. I'd have given the middle finger right away knowing I can find enjoyable work sans harassment. To put it crudely, I can't even sympathize with someone so willing to grab their ankles. Instead of telling your kids to avoid working at places with a polygraph, how about instilling some confidence and make it clear to them that if they are/become really good at what they do, they have the leverage to not put up with these things (at least in non-depressed employment markets).

icebraining 8y ago
How does "leverage" get you a job in Intelligence without passing a poly?
- joncrane 8y ago
  The leverage is the ability to make the same amount of money in a non-cleared role.
- grkvlt 8y ago
  By leveraging the fact that one is a UK citizen, and applying to SIS or GCHQ, I assume? Most other countries perform in-depth background checks, rather than relying on pseudo-science, when it comes to matters of national security.
  - ganoushoreilly 8y ago
    The background investigations are still performed, the poly is an additional layer added on, so that's the only real formal difference between countries.
    - MrMorden 8y ago
      I really want to believe that polygraphs are just used as an interrogation tool and not as a substitute for the SSBI. But the FBI gave Nada Nadim Prouty an SCI clearance even though she wasn't even lawfully present in the US, let alone a citizen. She was working for CIA when the next investigation was due, and they didn't have a problem either.
cryoshon 8y ago
>like a rat navigating through a maze built by superiors brilliant use of language here, you're spot on. while i agree that the public sector can foster a passive mentality, i didn't get that vibe from the author. they were just a person trying to put up with the bullshit that accompanied a job they loved.
jsoc815 8y ago
> this person's entire career reads like a rat navigating through a maze built by superiors.... it helps put into perspective the follower mentality some have... A few things: 1) The article was a fantastic read(!), and I couldn't help but think that the polygraph is a bit of a hazing ritual that is used to measure, not truthfulness/deception, but one's eagerness for the job and system. As a said in another post, once too many people begin to question a/the system that depends on wide-scale high levels of trust(compliance), it fails. The whole thing seemed to involve a lot of behavioral conditioning. Example 1: Offer computer access (so that you can do your supposed job) contingent upon one complying w/ and passing the poly. Example 2: Oh, you hate the poly and put up a fuss? Well, thanks for complying: here's a good performance review and raise.' So long as the writer responded appropriately to the bell, he/she received a treat. This is intro-level psych. 2) Though most are not subjected to polygraphs, the experience described over all, doesn't deviate from what most employees experience, unfortunately. You mentioned a maze, and you are correct. That's why the typical work arrangement is colloquially described as "the rat race". 3) A lot of people like "grabbing their ankles," as you say. As it's been explained to me numerous times, they appreciate the "structure" or "predictability." I try not to fight it anymore. Sheep make good eatin', and I realize I should just live as such. > ...they have the leverage to not put up with these things... As someone who's been around the block a bit, I no longer believe this. There are too many willing ankle grabbers in world that is more interested in compliance (ego-stroking of the insecure, actually) than in achieving perfection, or even just "better than." Of course, there are exceptions, but those are few and far between, IMO. So, the author suggested one coping mechanism, just as I above offered another. Cheers!
maxxxxx 8y ago
"it helps put into perspective the follower mentality some have, especially in the public sector. I'd have given the middle finger right away knowing I can find enjoyable work sans harassment. To put it crudely, I can't even sympathize with someone so willing to grab their ankles." That's such an arrogant thing to say if you have never been in this situation. History has long shown that when things get tough most people will fall in line and only a very few will resist. Talk is easy but actually acting is very tough and rare.
- endlessvoid94 8y ago
  What makes it arrogant? It's a starkly different perspective...but arrogant?
  - maxxxxx 8y ago
    The quote is "I'd have given the middle finger right away" How does that person know that without having been in that situation? It's so easy to say "I'd never do that" but history is full of examples where most people just fell in line. Just look at around at most big tech companies or banks. There are a lot of people who may not be comfortable with their employer's business practices but in the end they stay because they don't want to lose that nice paycheck. I am not judging these people, they are like most of us. I am judging people who say they are different without back it up.
    - kodablah 8y ago
      I have quit jobs for less, but I suppose nobody can have an opinion on what they'd quit over (or over and over) without being in exactly that situation. You know what's easier than saying what you'd do in a situation? Discounting what someone else might do by putting qualifiers on their ability to even say it.
      - maxxxxx 8y ago
        You wrote " I can't even sympathize with someone so willing to grab their ankles." I still think your attitude is very arrogant. Maybe one day you will be in a situation where you can't just quit and find anther job easily. This may help you learn to have more empathy with others who are in a less privileged position than you are.
ergothus 8y ago
What is a reasonable hoop to jump through and what is unreasonable is very subjective. Consider...on the east coast, interview suits are the norm. Even for a coding job where you will never wear a suit, it is reasonable to wonder why a candidate refused to wear a suit for an interview. West coast, though, the reverse is true. I had quite the culture shock coming from a govt job on the east coast to a Seattle coding job. I have anxiety and would find routine polygraphs stressful...but I also hate annual performance reviews and enjoy my 1:1s with managers. I'm sure others might look at my life and wonder why I choose certain issues as important and others as trivial. So while I have the same reactions as you when PERSONALLY considering the named job, I'm less inclined to snap judge the author as "so willing to grab their ankles"
- iooi 8y ago
  In NYC it's absolutely not expected or normal to wear a suit for a software engineering interview.
  - throwanem 8y ago
    Nor in Baltimore.
  - acjohnson55 8y ago
    Yeah, in most places, it would mark you as earnest, at best, and naive, at worst.
- exolymph 8y ago
  > would find routine polygraphs stressful What I would find intolerable is the persistence of the practice despite polygraphs being bullshit. I can't work for higher-ups that I don't respect, because I'm constitutionally unable to conceal my contempt. And it would be impossible to respect higher-ups that required regular polygraphs.
- kwhitefoot 8y ago
  The last time I wore a suit I was sixteen. That was 1971. Had to wear a tie at Mullard in Southampton, left in 1983 and haven't worn a tie since. Had a number of jobs as an electronics designer and software developer since in the UK and Norway. I just turn up to interviews neatly and quietly dressed. As far as I can tell my attire was of no consequence.
artsyxxx 8y ago
These sorts of situations are rife and you can pretty well tell from the interview where it's going. It needn't be a polygraph to know it's not worth the effort

icebraining 8y ago

How does "leverage" get you a job in Intelligence without passing a poly?

joncrane 8y ago
The leverage is the ability to make the same amount of money in a non-cleared role.
grkvlt 8y ago
By leveraging the fact that one is a UK citizen, and applying to SIS or GCHQ, I assume? Most other countries perform in-depth background checks, rather than relying on pseudo-science, when it comes to matters of national security.
- ganoushoreilly 8y ago
  The background investigations are still performed, the poly is an additional layer added on, so that's the only real formal difference between countries.
  - MrMorden 8y ago
    I really want to believe that polygraphs are just used as an interrogation tool and not as a substitute for the SSBI. But the FBI gave Nada Nadim Prouty an SCI clearance even though she wasn't even lawfully present in the US, let alone a citizen. She was working for CIA when the next investigation was due, and they didn't have a problem either.

cryoshon 8y ago

>like a rat navigating through a maze built by superiors brilliant use of language here, you're spot on. while i agree that the public sector can foster a passive mentality, i didn't get that vibe from the author. they were just a person trying to put up with the bullshit that accompanied a job they loved.

jsoc815 8y ago

> this person's entire career reads like a rat navigating through a maze built by superiors.... it helps put into perspective the follower mentality some have... A few things: 1) The article was a fantastic read(!), and I couldn't help but think that the polygraph is a bit of a hazing ritual that is used to measure, not truthfulness/deception, but one's eagerness for the job and system. As a said in another post, once too many people begin to question a/the system that depends on wide-scale high levels of trust(compliance), it fails. The whole thing seemed to involve a lot of behavioral conditioning. Example 1: Offer computer access (so that you can do your supposed job) contingent upon one complying w/ and passing the poly. Example 2: Oh, you hate the poly and put up a fuss? Well, thanks for complying: here's a good performance review and raise.' So long as the writer responded appropriately to the bell, he/she received a treat. This is intro-level psych. 2) Though most are not subjected to polygraphs, the experience described over all, doesn't deviate from what most employees experience, unfortunately. You mentioned a maze, and you are correct. That's why the typical work arrangement is colloquially described as "the rat race". 3) A lot of people like "grabbing their ankles," as you say. As it's been explained to me numerous times, they appreciate the "structure" or "predictability." I try not to fight it anymore. Sheep make good eatin', and I realize I should just live as such. > ...they have the leverage to not put up with these things... As someone who's been around the block a bit, I no longer believe this. There are too many willing ankle grabbers in world that is more interested in compliance (ego-stroking of the insecure, actually) than in achieving perfection, or even just "better than." Of course, there are exceptions, but those are few and far between, IMO. So, the author suggested one coping mechanism, just as I above offered another. Cheers!

maxxxxx 8y ago

"it helps put into perspective the follower mentality some have, especially in the public sector. I'd have given the middle finger right away knowing I can find enjoyable work sans harassment. To put it crudely, I can't even sympathize with someone so willing to grab their ankles." That's such an arrogant thing to say if you have never been in this situation. History has long shown that when things get tough most people will fall in line and only a very few will resist. Talk is easy but actually acting is very tough and rare.

endlessvoid94 8y ago
What makes it arrogant? It's a starkly different perspective...but arrogant?
- maxxxxx 8y ago
  The quote is "I'd have given the middle finger right away" How does that person know that without having been in that situation? It's so easy to say "I'd never do that" but history is full of examples where most people just fell in line. Just look at around at most big tech companies or banks. There are a lot of people who may not be comfortable with their employer's business practices but in the end they stay because they don't want to lose that nice paycheck. I am not judging these people, they are like most of us. I am judging people who say they are different without back it up.
  - kodablah 8y ago
    I have quit jobs for less, but I suppose nobody can have an opinion on what they'd quit over (or over and over) without being in exactly that situation. You know what's easier than saying what you'd do in a situation? Discounting what someone else might do by putting qualifiers on their ability to even say it.
    - maxxxxx 8y ago
      You wrote " I can't even sympathize with someone so willing to grab their ankles." I still think your attitude is very arrogant. Maybe one day you will be in a situation where you can't just quit and find anther job easily. This may help you learn to have more empathy with others who are in a less privileged position than you are.

ergothus 8y ago

What is a reasonable hoop to jump through and what is unreasonable is very subjective. Consider...on the east coast, interview suits are the norm. Even for a coding job where you will never wear a suit, it is reasonable to wonder why a candidate refused to wear a suit for an interview. West coast, though, the reverse is true. I had quite the culture shock coming from a govt job on the east coast to a Seattle coding job. I have anxiety and would find routine polygraphs stressful...but I also hate annual performance reviews and enjoy my 1:1s with managers. I'm sure others might look at my life and wonder why I choose certain issues as important and others as trivial. So while I have the same reactions as you when PERSONALLY considering the named job, I'm less inclined to snap judge the author as "so willing to grab their ankles"

iooi 8y ago
In NYC it's absolutely not expected or normal to wear a suit for a software engineering interview.
- throwanem 8y ago
  Nor in Baltimore.
- acjohnson55 8y ago
  Yeah, in most places, it would mark you as earnest, at best, and naive, at worst.
exolymph 8y ago
> would find routine polygraphs stressful What I would find intolerable is the persistence of the practice despite polygraphs being bullshit. I can't work for higher-ups that I don't respect, because I'm constitutionally unable to conceal my contempt. And it would be impossible to respect higher-ups that required regular polygraphs.
kwhitefoot 8y ago
The last time I wore a suit I was sixteen. That was 1971. Had to wear a tie at Mullard in Southampton, left in 1983 and haven't worn a tie since. Had a number of jobs as an electronics designer and software developer since in the UK and Norway. I just turn up to interviews neatly and quietly dressed. As far as I can tell my attire was of no consequence.

artsyxxx 8y ago

These sorts of situations are rife and you can pretty well tell from the interview where it's going. It needn't be a polygraph to know it's not worth the effort