Taurus Car Club of America : Ford Taurus Forum banner

Employee Drug Testing

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
1 - 20 of 32 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
So I have a debate coming up in my Business Ethics course, and it is on Employee drug testing being an immoral invasion of employee privacy. And I am asking for opinions here :p

I hope this thread does not get into any kind of chaos or bashing of other users/opinions. This is simply an open clean discussion whether or not you think it is immoral or not. (I know I will not judge anyone, I hope others respect that too if you are kind enough to send ideas, I also hope this is okay with mods, if not, feel free to remove it)

I want to get real feedback from real people as part of my debate, and the more feedback, the better. (Create some cool colorful graphs to use as a visual aid of random surveying :) )

If you have an opinion, but think others may be too judgmental about it, you can PM it to me and express it.

Also, if anyone has good articles they wish to share, I welcome that too, more sources the better as well :p
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
3,601 Posts
I think I have to vote on both questions... can you add a third choice to the second part for if we think it IS moral?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
Heh, I don't know how to edit a poll... It does qualify as a supporter for drug use, but against drug testing.

I could just word it differently in my main results when I get them.

Just if a supporter of recreational drug use/personal user.

Now this isn't saying should it be legalized though. But to me the only drawback about drug testing is it also detects thing done in the past. Some tests go far back to 90 days or more. So if someone "experimented", it will show, and could possibly affect their chances of getting a job.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,073 Posts
It depends on the job. If its something intense that you need 100% concentration at all times, like for example, flying a jet, commercial or military, or a job where you are responsible for other people's lives, say bus driver, it is fine to drug test.

But if its just a job where your a cashier at a timmy ho's, it shouldn't really matter if you like to smoke your reefer or not. Just as long as you don't go to work high, it wont affect anything.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
7,048 Posts
There might be something like "manage this topic's poll" at the top I think :dunno:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
Discussion Starter #6
There might be something like "manage this topic's poll" at the top I think :dunno:
[/b]
Not that I see of, I think the more important part is the first question anyway, second question is only to get a better understanding.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
175 Posts
As much of a pain as it is, I am for drug testing... Although only to a certain extent maybe? If its a serious job, then i'm for drug testing.... If its something insignificant then whatever... So more or less what animex said...
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,834 Posts
Discussion Starter #9
I personally hate this topic to be honest...

It has 2 sides, and I can't do that... (Even if I think there is a positive side to drug testing, I must ignore that fact)

I can see drug testing as a valid test for stuff mentioned where precision and a lot is being depended on. I can also see it being done on housekeepers/nannies. Of course, the fellow I sit next to in class even told me he used to work for a drug testing lab, and a housekeeper tested positive for Cocaine use. Would I want a cocaine user in my house? Probably not. Statistics have shown that drug abusers tend to be dishonest. (Not to say that regular people aren't either, but why risk it?)

Now a place like basic retail such as grocery stores, or many other jobs that exist, I see it as a pointless thing.

Needless to say, I can't go up there and say, "It's wrong if you are a minimum wage employee, but it is okay when you have to fly an airplane with hundreds of people depending on you"

Essentially, if it affects people somehow directly, testing is moral to me. If it would not affect someone directly that would involve some type of serious harm to another individual. I see no problem if someone decides to go toke up during the weekend. How to determine that would of course be a challenge.

Basically, I have to ignore the negative facts :\

My main problem is the only sources I am finding are places like marijuananews.com. Probably not the most creditable source out there.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,557 Posts
I see it as more of a choice of the employers. Drug users are not a protected class so if they want to discriminate against them, it's fine no matter what the job. It does set a certain atmosphere about the company. Maybe other employees will feel better about working in a place where there is a low likelihood that a co-worker is a drug user. In that case it could be seen as a competitive advantage to some. There is some additional costs in running tests on all applicants, but again, that's a business decision. Again from a business perspective, your employee is a representative of your company. If they're drug users they may impact the bottom line and would be a liability for the company.

For those that experimented and then applied for a job, perhaps it's a lesson to the applicant that they shouldn't have experimented. Being responsible and mature means knowing that there can be consequences long after the fact. Suffice to say, I have no sympathy for that situation.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,958 Posts
I see it as more of a choice of the employers. Drug users are not a protected class so if they want to discriminate against them, it's fine no matter what the job. It does set a certain atmosphere about the company. Maybe other employees will feel better about working in a place where there is a low likelihood that a co-worker is a drug user. In that case it could be seen as a competitive advantage to some. There is some additional costs in running tests on all applicants, but again, that's a business decision. Again from a business perspective, your employee is a representative of your company. If they're drug users they may impact the bottom line and would be a liability for the company.

For those that experimented and then applied for a job, perhaps it's a lesson to the applicant that they shouldn't have experimented. Being responsible and mature means knowing that there can be consequences long after the fact. Suffice to say, I have no sympathy for that situation.
[/b]

It's a tough area. In HS I was high all day every day, whether I had work or not. My job did not drug test and even if they did, if it was just a pee test, there were ways around it. My CEO at my current job feels it is a gross invasion of privacy. What you do in your own time is your business, so long as your at work performance is up to par. I can see that and agree with his reasoning.

I can also see how one would WANT their employees tested. Your employees, no matter how "insignificant" you may see a position, reflect your business. A cashier at Tim Hortons is just as responsible for the image of your location as the marketing manager at Corporate. I see that cashier whenever I go in as a customer. As an owner, I want my customers coming back, so their job is not insignificant. As an employee, I likely need that job otherwise why would I be working, which makes it not so insignificant. That argument gets thrown right out the window.

Push come to shove, I am a business owner, I will not do drug testing but I will have the option to do it whenever I see fit. I notice my employees are doped up a lot, constantly late to work from a night of too much use, etc ... you bet your ass I am implementing drug testing. I'd give the benefit of the doubt until the doubt outweighs my faith in your respect for me and my business.

After all, all employers are out to make money. Why should I make less money potentially because you want to go home and get f***ed up and expect me to deal with it and pay you?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
15,578 Posts
Well, I voted that I think it's right for employers to drug test their employees or prospective hires, and at the same time I'm fine with recreational drug use (as long as it doesn't have an impact on work). I do believe that marijuana should be legalized, not because I want to smoke it, but because I have a problem with the millions and millions of dollars spent each year on the war on drugs.

With that said, if marijuana was legal, I would still support random drug testing at a company, because:
1 - It would separate the wheat from the chaff REAL quickly...
2 - It would ensure that the job was getting done and wasn't impacted by employee's outside activities.

The reason for #2, mostly, is because I work for a defense subcontractor, and while some people may think better when they're stoned, most do not, and I can't afford for a missile to not hit it's intended target because someone transposed a 0 and a 1 when they were baked.

JR
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
971 Posts
we get drug tested on a regular basis.
if we get into an accident we get drug tested.
[/b]
Pretty much the same thing here, we get pulled randomly for a drug test as well as if we're on duty and are involved in an accident where either of the vehicles involved cannot leave under their own power OR there are injuries, then it is mandatory and the driver is suspended pending the drug test results.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,959 Posts
Well, I voted that I think it's right for employers to drug test their employees or prospective hires, and at the same time I'm fine with recreational drug use (as long as it doesn't have an impact on work). I do believe that marijuana should be legalized, not because I want to smoke it, but because I have a problem with the millions and millions of dollars spent each year on the war on drugs.

With that said, if marijuana was legal, I would still support random drug testing at a company, because:
1 - It would separate the wheat from the chaff REAL quickly...
2 - It would ensure that the job was getting done and wasn't impacted by employee's outside activities.

The reason for #2, mostly, is because I work for a defense subcontractor, and while some people may think better when they're stoned, most do not, and I can't afford for a missile to not hit it's intended target because someone transposed a 0 and a 1 when they were baked.

JR
[/b]

Agreed on all points.

Working in healthcare, recreational drug use is highly frowned upon. I occasionally hear stories about RN's stealing meds or MD's spouses using prescription pads to forge illegal prescriptions. The military hospitals I've worked in have regular random drug testing (and yet somehow I was always picked), while the civilian hospitals make the employee agree to random drug testing, but rarely enforce it. They will drug test if there is an accident at work though.

You certainly do not want a nurse administering meds when high or drunk, yet there is no random alcohol testing. That bothers me.... and basically sums up my whole view on marijuana versus alcohol as illegal and legal substances. It's a double standard. Legalize it, but tax the hell out of it. Tax liquor too, but leave beer alone :D

Most healthcare systems have mandated that tobacco use is no longer allowed at the facility. They recognize the health risks and costs associated with smoking and dipping.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,654 Posts
I dont see any problems with drug testing as long as everyone invovled knows ow the game is going to be played. If its random testing, then let everyone know how the names will be picked and keep it open and on the level. If its going to be manditory, you have no excuse if you fail the test, you knew it was going to happen. When its durring a job interview, if you fail the test, well, you werent thinking to clear when you were looking for that new job so maybe its a good thing you didnt pass because you were "experimenting" before the interview.
I dont like it when for no reason with no set policy a boss will make someone take a drug test just because they may think they were using on there off time, when its just the boss trying to bust someone and make an example of them. BTW, in my 48 years I have "experimented" with recreational drugs :blink: and enjoyed some extra prescription drugs ;) but have never cheated on or failed a drug test for my job.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,583 Posts
as sue-happy as our culture has become, an employee under the influence of a substance is a huge liability for an employer. even if that person can still opperate perfectly while using some sort of drug, if an accident were to occur, that employer would be SOL.

im all for drug testing. im not necessarily against drugs, but anyone who is a user must realize that there are some potentially unavoidable employment-related trade-offs. if someone wants to use drugs, they should be understanding of potential or existing employers requiring a drug test. its part of the risk that illegal actions entail. its not an invasion of privacy. its a way for an employer to watch his ass.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,219 Posts
My problem with drug testing ... it takes too long. 2 weeks is too long
[/b]
Wow. Where? We get our results back withing a day or two or testing.

I can also see how one would WANT their employees tested. Your employees, no matter how "insignificant" you may see a position, reflect your business. A cashier at Tim Hortons is just as responsible for the image of your location as the marketing manager at Corporate. I see that cashier whenever I go in as a customer. As an owner, I want my customers coming back, so their job is not insignificant. As an employee, I likely need that job otherwise why would I be working, which makes it not so insignificant. That argument gets thrown right out the window.

After all, all employers are out to make money. Why should I make less money potentially because you want to go home and get f***ed up and expect me to deal with it and pay you?
[/b]
xeleventy billion on these parts!!!!

That cashier, cart pusher, janitor, receiving associate, or delivery guy is almost ALWAYS the first/last person a customer sees when doing business. Regardless of how "insignificant" some people see these jobs to be, they are the most important people at a business. If my customer saw Tommy tokin' up behind the gym while picking up her daughter, then saw him handling her money, credit card, check, or typing in her information for warranty coverage at my store, what do you think she'll think of my store?

Whether you agree with the law or not, the law is the law and it is ILLEGAL to use certain substances. By using, or even experimenting with these substances, you should accept FULL responsibility for the outcome of these actions, including failing a pre-employment drug test. If you don't think that's fair, than you obviously can't weigh the consequences of your actions in your head before acting, which shows a certain amount of immaturity.

And.. about the liability of using drugs on the job, coming to work high, or testing positive: There are absolutely no positions at my employer where I can even begin to rationalize how using wouldn't affect your performance. You're either handling money, people's information, dealing with thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, operating machinery with an age restriction, or trying to provide customer service. If you're high, I don't want you working for me, and thank God, my employer backs me up on this.

We do pre-employment testing, we do random drug testing, and to drug tests after accidents at my place of employment.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
62 Posts
I voted that it is okay for employers to do piss testing. It's not your right to be hired by a company, and I agree that they need to screen people to get the best person for the job. That said, I am a daily user(not abuser!) of marijuana and occasional user of other recreational drugs. i have a job at a restaurant and have never been piss tested there. However if someone were to test meat any point in the last 2 years I would have tested positive for more than one illegal substance most likely.

xeleventy billion on these parts!!!!

That cashier, cart pusher, janitor, receiving associate, or delivery guy is almost ALWAYS the first/last person a customer sees when doing business. Regardless of how "insignificant" some people see these jobs to be, they are the most important people at a business. If my customer saw Tommy tokin' up behind the gym while picking up her daughter, then saw him handling her money, credit card, check, or typing in her information for warranty coverage at my store, what do you think she'll think of my store?

Whether you agree with the law or not, the law is the law and it is ILLEGAL to use certain substances. By using, or even experimenting with these substances, you should accept FULL responsibility for the outcome of these actions, including failing a pre-employment drug test. If you don't think that's fair, than you obviously can't weigh the consequences of your actions in your head before acting, which shows a certain amount of immaturity.

And.. about the liability of using drugs on the job, coming to work high, or testing positive: There are absolutely no positions at my employer where I can even begin to rationalize how using wouldn't affect your performance. You're either handling money, people's information, dealing with thousands of dollars worth of merchandise, operating machinery with an age restriction, or trying to provide customer service. If you're high, I don't want you working for me, and thank God, my employer backs me up on this.

We do pre-employment testing, we do random drug testing, and to drug tests after accidents at my place of employment.
[/b]

So what is your stance on legal medical cannabis users?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
26 Posts
I tend to be a libertarian on most issues...if it doesn't negatively impact me, I think other people should be allowed to do as they please. I'm for the decriminalization of street drugs just so we can do away with drug-related violence and all the associated legal costs...let the users buy their crap and tax the hell out of it so they can pay for the costs of this social ill. Admittedly, more people would still be trapped in the chains of addiction and there would be more deaths due to overdoses. Our current method of dealing with drugs does not work...people can get drugs behind bars with armed guards watching them for God's sake.

I think if people feel free to take recreational drugs, then employers have the right to be fully informed of this and have the right not to employ them. If, for example, employees have to drive on public roads during the course of their employment, the employer is legally responsible for any damage caused by the employee while driving. I do not think it would be justifiable for drug users to be able to hide their drug use and shift the consequenses for their lack of reflexes/judgement onto their employers. The same argument would hold true if drug use could negatively impact safety or even the quality of goods or services that an employer provides to the general public.

I think if you want to use drugs, you and you alone should bear the various burdens imposed by said drugs.
 
1 - 20 of 32 Posts
Top