The Conservative Cave
Current Events => The DUmpster => Topic started by: bijou on December 15, 2008, 01:44:17 PM
-
undeterred Donating Member (1000+ posts) Journal Click to send private message to this author Click to view this author's profile Click to add this author to your buddy list Click to add this author to your Ignore list Mon Dec-15-08 01:48 PM
Original message
Poll question: Should pre-employment drug testing be legal?
Its increasingly common that in order to be employed you have to pass a drug screen. And what does a drug screen do? It tells whether or not someone has used drugs within a given length of time:
Drug Detection Time
Alcohol 6–24 hours
Amphetamines 2–3 days
Barbituates 1 day to 3 weeks
Benzodiazepines 3–7 days
Cocaine 2–5 days
Codeine 3–5 days
Euphorics (MDMA, Ecstasy) 1–3 days
LSD 1-4 days
Marijuana (THC) 7–30 days
Methadone 3–5 days
Methaqualone 14 days
Opiates 1-4 days
Phencyclidine (PCP) 2–4 days
Steroids (anabolic) 14–30 days
Is it reasonable for a potential employer to discriminate on this basis or should it be illegal?
Poll result (74 votes)
Yes, it protects the employer (13 votes, 18%) Vote
No, its an invasion of privacy (59 votes, 80%) Vote
OTHER (2 votes, 3%) Vote
No surprise there then (http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4656153)
-
What a shock...the scum of society don`t want to be found out or responsible for their actions.
-
pre-employment drug testing is infinitely preferable to random drug testing . . . jus' sayin' . . . :innocent:
-
That's an interesting thread. While most of the DUmmies are voting no, most of the people who posted a response are saying yes and explaining why.
I guess it's just the automatic DUmmy reaction: Don't take away my right to smoke pot man!
-
pre-employment drug testing is infinitely preferable to random drug testing . . . jus' sayin' . . . :innocent:
Oh Hell yeah. Of course in the military you get both.
What does it tell you about someone if, on the day they would normally be expected to put their absolutely best foot forward and be going as showing as close to 100% of perfect as they could possibly project, they show up high on drugs? Really, who in their right mind would want anyone that damned stupid underfoot in the workplace?
-
pre-employment drug testing is infinitely preferable to random drug testing . . . jus' sayin' . . . :innocent:
We have both where I work. If you are injured while on the job, a drug screen is also required.
-
Oh Hell yeah. Of course in the military you get both.
What does it tell you about someone if, on the day they would normally be expected to put their absolutely best foot forward and be going as showing as close to 100% of perfect as they could possibly project, they show up high on drugs? Really, who in their right mind would want anyone that damned stupid underfoot in the workplace?
I know someone that was contracting at a company, and they wanted to hire her full time. she failed her drug screen. and THEN her company gave her another chance, pending a passing result on a drug screen in the next 6 weeks. they waited 4 weeks, just long enough for the pot to leave her system, and . . . . she failed it again.
:loser:
-
pre-employment drug testing is infinitely preferable to random drug testing . . . jus' sayin' . . . :innocent:
you = bad boy!! ;) hehe
-
you = bad boy!! ;) hehe
honestly, I haven't done an illegal drug that I can remember since college.
-
pre-employment drug testing is infinitely preferable to random drug testing . . . jus' sayin' . . . :innocent:
I don't know if this is the case for everyone, but I've never been asked to take a drug test after I've been with a company for a while. I've only had to take one before being hired.
-
honestly, I haven't done an illegal drug that I can remember since college.
You with your sordid past ;) hehe
-
Warpy (1000+ posts) Mon Dec-15-08 01:58 PM
Response to Original message
2. The problem is that the tests don't quantify the drugs
or even distinguish between many drugs in the same family. There are also quite a few false positives.
Companies who rely on this are denying themselves access to a pool of highly qualified employees because of these stupid things.
Drug testing is only advisable when an employee suddenly becomes erratic on the job, increasing absenteeism and making a lot of serious mistakes. Then it can uncover a problem which the company might choose to offer a valued employee treatment for.
When a test for opiates is positive after a couple of poppyseed muffins, the problem is the test, not the employee.
I wonder how tolerent Warpy might be if "a lot of serious mistakes" is what it takes to drug test a doctor* or lawyer* whom he or a loved one is in need of.
*and/or:
- a police officer
- the person in charge of Warpy's payroll
- a dentist
- a fireman
- a mechanic
- a cook
- accountant
- the person doing Warpy's taxes
- the engineer who designed the bridge he drives over next
- etc etc (etc etc etc etc) :evillaugh:
-
Democrats_win (1000+ posts) Mon Dec-15-08 02:02 PM
Response to Original message
4. Why do DU polls leave out the category: Hell NO! ?
The drug testing is another instance of capitalism forgetting that they exist to serve us. Not the other way around. If they can't give jobs to people and they refuse to pay taxes, then what's the point?
Maybe the bush depression will change their attitude. They are damn lucky to be doing business in America. Instead they tell us that we are lucky to have their fricking jobs. "Take this job and shuv it!"
Whoa nelly. :o
Capitalism (economic liberty) exist (such as it is in existance) to provide freedom in the marketplace, not to give reefer addicts a paycheck.
Sidenote:
Unrelated to the above, all through grade school I thought "reefer addict" was one word and it meant retarded. :p
-
Where I used to work we had pre-employment tests plus random ones plus accident ones, and ones to get a raise.
I would never knowingly let someone stoned so anything for me even as small as trying on shoes. I think it is an insult and a total disservice to customers to NOT give your employees tests. Then again I am not a drug addicted loser idiot that posts on DU.
-
pre-employment drug testing is infinitely preferable to random drug testing . . . jus' sayin' . . . :innocent:
Try working for someone who does BOTH. AND random vehicle/lunchbox/etc inspections, random FFD (fitness for duty) checks, etc...
-
Whoa nelly. :o
Capitalism (economic liberty) exist (such as it is in existance) to provide freedom in the marketplace, not to give reefer addicts a paycheck.
Sidenote:
Unrelated to the above, all through grade school I thought "reefer addict" was one word and it meant retarded. :p
:jerkit:
that may not be the most deranged post that i have ever read on DU, but it is definitely top 5 material.
-
all through grade school I thought "reefer addict" was one word and it meant retarded. :p
Well, you were right on the second part.
-
Where I used to work we had pre-employment tests plus random ones plus accident ones, and ones to get a raise.
I would never knowingly let someone stoned so anything for me even as small as trying on shoes. I think it is an insult and a total disservice to customers to NOT give your employees tests. Then again I am not a drug addicted loser idiot that posts on DU.
sometimes, around here, I think we would be better off to promote all of the stoned employees. :-)
-
Does welfare quit when the economy goes bad? Since they aren't going to be looking for any work anyway, why would they care about drug testing?
Should they ever leave the basement and go to a job interview, I suppose they're going to ask if there's a drug test they have to pass. Since they're asking questions. I think another good thing for them to ask is if they ever press charges.
.
-
I work for a one man company and even I'm subject to random drug testing. One of my clients requires that all companies they contract with have a drug testing policy in place with random screening.
So far after almost 15 years in business my number never came up so it's not an issue. :naughty:
-
Who drug tests the drug tester? That's a question I once asked. I don't know those people. Why should I trust them to judge me?
-
Who drug tests the drug tester? That's a question I once asked. I don't know those people. Why should I trust them to judge me?
When was the last time a politician had to piss in the cup? ANY politician?
-
I say pre employment AND random , like many of the jobs here are. You're also tested after any major writeup or accident.
I'd also support regular mandatory drug testing for any person paid benefits from the public purse. Every time they go in to get their welfare is about the right frequency.
-
I say pre employment AND random , like many of the jobs here are. You're also tested after any major writeup or accident.
I'd also support regular mandatory drug testing for any person paid benefits from the public purse. Every time they go in to get their welfare is about the right frequency.
Absolutely. All people on welfare should have to do a random drug test every 6 mths. Any drugs they are taking legally for medical conditions excluded of course
-
When a test for opiates is positive after a couple of poppyseed muffins, the problem is the test, not the employee.
Doesn't happen. Another liberal myth.
-
Doesn't happen. Another liberal myth.
I thought MythBusters showed that poppy seeds would cause a positive.
-
I thought MythBusters showed that poppy seeds would cause a positive.
They can, I believe you have to have a lot of them before it will show up.
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24090561-2,00.html
I'd imagine that one could notify the testing officer that you'd consumed a quantity of poppy seed within the previous x hours before the test and be retested the following day. This assumes that you've only had a small quantity of poppy seed and the metabolite they test for should be entirely gone.
-
When I ran the coffee shop we had a random drug testing policy. Once the owner asked me if we should test everyone I said "Sure, if you only want you and me to run the place while we hire a new staff." We didn't test anyone. LOL
At the dealership we had a piss cup test before employment, and they have a policy for random testing, but they've never done it. You pretty much know who smokes pot after work. And again, I don't think they want to have to hire a bunch of new techs and parts guys either. lol
-
I thought MythBusters showed that poppy seeds would cause a positive.
You'd have to eat a lot of them. A couple of poppy seed muffins won't do it.
-
When I ran the coffee shop we had a random drug testing policy. Once the owner asked me if we should test everyone I said "Sure, if you only want you and me to run the place while we hire a new staff." We didn't test anyone. LOL
At the dealership we had a piss cup test before employment, and they have a policy for random testing, but they've never done it. You pretty much know who smokes pot after work. And again, I don't think they want to have to hire a bunch of new techs and parts guys either. lol
The last time I was working for someone other than myself, they didn't have a pre-employment test , but it was written into your contract that you could be randomly tested.
Never happened though. If they'd tried that there would have been maybe 2 or three staff out of 30 or so remaining after.
-
Where I used to work we had pre-employment tests plus random ones plus accident ones, and ones to get a raise.
I would never knowingly let someone stoned so anything for me even as small as trying on shoes. I think it is an insult and a total disservice to customers to NOT give your employees tests. Then again I am not a drug addicted loser idiot that posts on DU.
I get random test for my bondsman license, got a pre-employment test from the retail outlet I work part-time for which also has a clause for accidents and or merchandise destruction over $200. Like dropping a $600 door off the forklift!
We had one guy zoom out the back door without lowering the forks. Put two nice holes above the door and ruined the door to the tune of $3500. Surprise, surprise! He tested positive for Mary Jane and meth! Lucky he didn't kill himself or somebody else!
Tell me again employers shouldn't be allowed to drug test their employyees! DUmbasses! :whatever:
-
You'd have to eat a lot of them. A couple of poppy seed muffins won't do it.
I used to joke with our safety director about eating poppy seed muffins for breakfast, but only because i got hit with 3 random test in 1 year. Idiots, I've never done anything but alcohol and caffeine. :hammer:
-
The son of one of my parents' neighbors was in the Army (and it really pissed me off that he did this as a cavalryman!) came up hot for opiates, and he blamed it on poppy seeds. It worked on his parents, but not on the drug control people in 11th ACR.
Good for the Blackhorse. Today, said offspring goes from one job to another, knowing that his father (who is well-connected in that local Dem party) will help him out.
-
At the dealership we had a piss cup test before employment, and they have a policy for random testing, but they've never done it. You pretty much know who smokes pot after work. And again, I don't think they want to have to hire a bunch of new techs and parts guys either. lol
Good to know that the guys in charge of making your car safe are burnt out stoners. :thatsright: