-3

without a blanket ban on the use of polygraphs. Currently 31 states have regulated the use of polygraph testing by employers.

State regulations have struck a reasonable balance between the rights of current employees and the rights of employers, prescribing guidelines and standards for polygraph examiners. However, if should Congress deem it necessary to proceed to establish federal uniformity on polygraph use, SBLC recommends passage of amendments to S. 1815 that would: 1. establish minimum standards for the use of polygraph tests in employment; 2. provide for the certification of polygraph examiners; 3. set minimum standards for polygraph examiners; and 4. provide relief for improper use of polygraphs.

The rights of prospective and present employees could be protected by making examinations voluntary, prohibiting the use of polygraph tests as the sole standard for determining employment status, and providing examinees access to polygraph results. In addition, polygraph examiners should be restricted from inquiring into religious beliefs or affiliations, beliefs or opinions regarding racial matters, and other protected subject matter. Only by striking a balanced approach will Congress protect the rights of employees and recognize the practical needs of American business in assuring consumers safe and reasonably priced merchandise.

SBLC strongly recommends that the

Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee amend S. 1815 to recognize the legitimate rights of private sector employers. We thank you for this opportunity to present our views and look forward to working with the Committee.

United States Senate

Committee on Labor and Human Resources

Statement of the

Society of Independent Gasoline Marketers of America

Regarding S.1815

April 23, 1986

The Society of Independent Gasoline Marketers of America ("SIGMA") is a national trade association of 316 chain retailers and independent marketers of motor fuels. SIGMA's members market refined petroleum products in all 50 states through over 16,500 retail outlets and employ approximately 98,000 people. SIGMA's members sales constitute between 15 and 20 percent of the retail market for gasoline in the United States.

Independent marketers and chain retailers, such as SIGMA's members, historically have been recognized as the most innovative and cost-effective segment of the retail gasoline market. Such companies have pioneered cost-effective marketing techniques such as self service, automatic dispensing units, and the high volume/low margin style of retailing. These marketing techniques generate substantial cost savings and minimize the amount of fixed costs which must be recovered in the selling price of each unit of motor fuel. As a result of these innovations and their superior operating controls, SIGMA's members are able to offer motor fuels to American consumers at the lowest possible cost. Historically, SIGMA's members have been viewed as the most price-competitive segment of the domestic retail motor fuels market.

SIGMA opposes legislation that would prohibit employers' use of polygraphs or other devices designed to detect deception in relation to the employment relationship. SIGMA members have found such testing a useful component of a program to prevent employee theft through pre-employment screening and post-employment

- 2

testing. Prohibiting the use of such tests would invite increased employee theft and render screening of prospective employees more expensive and less effective. SIGMA believes that banning polygraph and similar testing is the first step in a campaign to eliminate other legitimate techniques for screening prospective employees and investigating current employees. The increased costs of employee theft and ineffective screening would be passed on to consumers in the form of higher prices. Moreover, legislation banning the use of polygraphs overlooks the valuable advantage polygraph testing gives to honest employees.

Polygraph Testing Assists Retailers in Controlling Shortages

Polygraph testing has been a necessary and invaluable procedure for companies in the retail gasoline industry. They incorporate such a procedure into their internal programs to protect themselves against theft. Our industry is especially vulnerable to employee theft because it depends heavily on high sales volume and cash operations.

Shortages are a way of life in retailing. It is impractical for a retailer whose operations incorporate high sales volumes and cash transactions, as well as a broad physical inventory such as that in a convenience store, to justify and to account for all of his physical inventory and cash at the end of each shift. Thus, retailers, as a class, constantly are faced with shortages. As a result, shortage control becomes a way of life in the retailing industry.

Employee theft of inventory and cash is largely responsible for shortages in our industry. We do not claim that polygraph or similar testing are perfect. Nevertheless, we have found such testing to be a reliable and effective technique which assists us in controlling shortages.

Polygraph testing prevents employee theft through improved evaluation of prospective employees and deters thefts through the credible threat of identifying those responsible for crimes that do occur. Without such testing, losses due to employee theft

-2

tests are effective in reducing employee theft and providing a safe workplace for all. Many businesses choose not to use polygraphs but it is their choice and for those businesses who need such security we believe the option should remain in their hands.

S. 1818 would prohibit the use of lie detectors by private employers, with limited exceptions, for pre-employment screening, or in discharging, dismissing or disciplining an employee. The prohibition against the use of lie detectors would include polygraphs, deceptographs, voice stress analyzer, psychological stress evaluators, or any similar device using mechanical, electrical or chemical methods as a truth verifier.

It is important to note that S. 1815 would permit the use of polygraph tests by the United States Government, a state government, city, or other political subdivision. As an exception to the ban on private employer use, personnel of Department of Defense contractors with access to classified information could be subjected to polygraph examinations as well. S. 1815 would preempt all current state regulations. It appears contradictory to recognize the validity of polygraph tests in some instances and not others. It would be more appropriate for the government to establish standards rather than pick and choose exceptions.

SBLC recognizes the need to protect the rights of the individual but we believe this protection can be established through the use of minimum standards, if the Congress feels compelled to address this at all.

Most firms readily admit the test alone does not constitute an adequate security program. Assurances can be built into a regulatory system as can standards for examiners, if necessary, to address the examinees' concerns

-3

without a blanket ban on the use of polygraphs. Currently 31 states have regulated the use of polygraph testing by employers.

State regulations have struck a reasonable balance between the rights of current employees and the rights of employers, prescribing guidelines and standards for polygraph examiners. However, if should Congress deem it necessary to proceed to establish federal uniformity on polygraph use, SBLC recommends passage of amendments to S. 1815 that would: 1. establish minimum standards for the use of polygraph tests in employment; 2. provide for the certification of polygraph examiners; 3. set minimum standards for polygraph examiners; and 4. provide relief for improper use of polygraphs.

The rights of prospective and present employees could be protected by making examinations voluntary, prohibiting the use of polygraph tests as the sole standard for determining employment status, and providing examinees access to polygraph results. In addition, polygraph examiners should be restricted from inquiring into religious beliefs or affiliations, beliefs or opinions regarding racial matters, and other protected subject matter. Only by striking a balanced approach will Congress protect the rights of employees and recognize the practical needs of American business in assuring consumers safe and reasonably priced merchandise. SBLC strongly recommends that the Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee amend S. 1815 to recognize the legitimate rights of private sector employers. We thank you for this opportunity to present our views and look forward to working with the Committee.