Would you/do you submit to drug tests at work?

[Floyd Eye]

Quit lusting after someone else's money dude. You wanna get yours? Go out and get it. You don't deserve to take anything from anybody.

 

[Unrepresented]

You actually think that as a citizen you deserve to have a say in how much a company pays their CEO?

Man.

And we wonder why this country is so screwed up?

As a citizen I have some say in how much a company pays its lowest ranking employees. Why shouldn't the highest ranking employee be determined as well?

 

[Lowactnsatsfctn]

It is in my interest what employees are paid because there are a finite number of ways that a company's income can be distributed between payroll, investments, research, etc. The more the guys at the top are paid the less room there is for everything else. A maximum wage means increased research and investment -- which means more jobs created/better products and services for consumers, or increased pay for the other employees lower down the totem pole.

Or a bunch of industries leaving.
Sounds more like Jealousy to me. Other than that, I'm not sue why you Don't like it. That could be you at the top if you so desired. Let Caesar have what is his, and go build your own Empire.

 

[1958Bassman]

Existence forces us to work. We need food, we need shelter. Work is a necessity. Why not make that necessity just a shade or two less demeaning and intrusive by controlling what we as employees have to sacrifice to get through life?

That's unfortunate. My start up will be testing for those skills.

Work isn't a necessity, food, water and shelter are necessities. Work is just what we trade for the money that allows us to support ourselves. If someone doesn't have a decent skill set, they shouldn't expect to make much money or barter with. If someone decides that they want to use drugs, that makes them less attractive as job candidates than someone who doesn't use drugs. Whether they have better skills and/or work ethic, who knows? I know plenty of people who don't do drugs and whose work ethic absolutely sucks but they aren't defying the company by refusing to do the test. If a company decides to hire drug users and they don't really want that kind of activity, they will watch those people like a hawk and that takes tehm away from their normal duties. That costs the company.

Are you forgetting that jobs don't exist without a need for workers? Who creates that need, BTW? Employers, public and private, that's who.

I don't think there's any reason for a job to be demeaning, but somebody has to clean toilets, dig ditches and work jobs that suck. A job isn't a gift from on high, nor is it something that someone, as an employee can force on a company or government agency. A prospective employee needs to meet some set of requirements and if that includes NOT doing drugs, don't expect employers to change for those who don't meet this particular requirement. It's not like a gender, race or disability issue- people weren't born with the need to do drugs unless their mother was addicted during pregnancy and that was forced on the child(ren) she was bearing. Refusing to take a drug test is like hearing what the employer is looking for and saying "I can do that, but you have to allow me to use drugs on my own time". Guess how far that will get you.

 

[Floyd Eye]

As a citizen I have some say in how much a company pays its lowest ranking employees. Why shouldn't the highest ranking employee be determined as well?

First of all you ( politicians really, but whatever) SHOULD NOT have a say in what someone is paid on the bottom end. If someone doesn't want to work for what I pay, they are free to look elsewhere.

Second of all, the argument used to support minimum wage is that it keeps employers from being able to keep wages low "Collectively". Which is a a ridiculous argument, nevertheless, your argument for capping out wages has no logical reason. It is motivated by greed and lust after something someone else owns.

I'm betting your favorite bass player makes tons of money, yet somehow I doubt that you are advocating taking anything from him. I am also willing to bet you are ranting against companies like Apple while responding to this thread on an I phone someone else bought for you. lol

 

[Floyd Eye]

Are you forgetting that jobs don't exist without a need for workers? Who created that need, BTW?

I don't think there's any reason for a job to be demeaning, but somebody has to clean toilets, dig ditches and work jobs that suck.

Hey, I dig ditches all the time. I get paid well for it too.

Just giving ditch diggers something to aspire to.

 

[chadds]

The power is yours. Work there or not. Do whatever is in your pee or not.
& I really understand what irks you about this.

You don't seem to be petitioning the govt or running for office or attempting civil disobidience to change the law so we drive on the left side of the road.
Way I see it you have a right but you choose to abide by the "way", "law", "customs", here.

You pay to see a show people tell you where to stand, when to go on in, and not to dance in the aisles. These are choices you make that you pay for. So why just your drug of choice?

Is there another drug that you wouldn't want your fellow employees doing the night before work?

Is it invasive?
Yep.
Did someone make it necessary?
Yep.

Bump

 

[Lowactnsatsfctn]

Hey, I dig ditches all the time. I get paid well for it too.

Just giving ditch diggers something to aspire to.

Nothing wrong with that, especially if you can find some enjoyment in it.

I've never heard some one say, "must suck to get dirty for prevailing wage"

 

[sloasdaylight]

Weed's not legal, companies don't want employees who are breaking the law and as a result of their illegal actions may put the company in some sort of liability, like having to find a new employee, or some other such thing. Companies are allowed to run background checks on potential employees to rule out felons if they feel like it, I think they should be able to rule out employee who smoke weed should they choose, despite the fact that I think weed should be legal.

I've smoked weed once, and never done anything "harder" than that, but I have come to work with a blinding hangover before and nearly dropped an ink knife into a multi-million dollar printing press. Had that ink knife gone in, it would have cost me not only my job, but the company hundreds of thousands of dollars, as well as other employees days worth of pay.

What you do on your own time can absolutely have an effect on your company and on others around you.

 

[BawanaRik]

I wonder how many of these anti testing folks are against testing for DUI? After all isn't that also a privacy issue?

No I'm not. If you are against random drug tests, you are against random drug tests. You can't say testing for weed is an invasion of privacy, but testing for meth isn't.

 

[Floyd Eye]

Nothing wrong with that, especially if you can find some enjoyment in it.

I've never heard some one say, "must suck to get dirty for prevailing wage"

While I dig holes with shovels damn near every day, most of my digging is actually done with a 2 sticker. And yes, prevailing wage is nice.

 

[Frenchy-Lefty]

A lot of totally off topic comments in this thread! To stick to the subject: I am an employer and the peeps I hire need to drive a company car. Some are minimum wage employees some are managers and heck yes they need to pass a drug test. If you don't like it you don't have to work for me. Does the word liability means anything to anyone?

 

[Floyd Eye]

A lot of totally off topic comments in this thread! To stick to the subject: I am an employer and the peeps I hire need to drive a company car. Some are minimum wage employees some are managers and heck yes they need to pass a drug test. If you don't like it you don't have to work for me. Does the word liability means anything to anyone?

Sure does to me brother.

 

[BawanaRik]

Many of these "stick and drip" testing devices are really iffy. They tend to be qualitative rather than quantitative. They also tend to be operator sensitive.

The ACLU may have a point but what they tend to miss is that virtually all the wrong results are false negatives.
_____________________________________________________

Also, with regard to these new tests that prove if you are currently high, I would point out that the ACLU, which is a leading opponent of random drug testing, claims that clinical lab tests for drugs are inaccurate. So if a full work up by scientists is inaccurate, what does that say about a swab in your mouth?

Again, are you going to trust the safety of your children, gramma or the 300 people on that plane to a swab US Air bought at Walgreens?

 

[BawanaRik]

Didn't Phil Ochs do a song about that? Small Circle of Friends.

The point of law is to serve citizens.
If enough citizens think a law is unfair, the law will have to change. This kind of thing doesn't happen by itself. People have to actively fight for it.
Is your point that everybody should shut up, not discuss existing laws and leave everything as is?

 

[Bass_Pounder]

Are you allowed to hire or fire employees based on the fact that they drink alcohol at home? smoke cigarettes? Play bass guitar? Surf?

Why should an employer have a right to discriminate against one particular facet of society when nearly all others are protected by anti-discrimination laws?

Arguably yes, simply because it is illegal, but I don't believe that to be just for exactly the same reason.

Actually, YES................

There are many jobs now that require you to be nicotine free, and do test for it.

 

[1958Bassman]

As a citizen I have some say in how much a company pays its lowest ranking employees. Why shouldn't the highest ranking employee be determined as well?

How does a citizen get to tell a private company how much to pay ANYONE? Other than refusing to buy their goods and services after finding out how they treat the employees, you really don't. If you didn't know, how would you have any say?

 

[Floyd Eye]

Many of these "stick and drip" testing devices are really iffy. They tend to be qualitative rather than quantitative. They also tend to be operator sensitive.

The ACLU may have a point but what they tend to miss is that virtually all the wrong results are false negatives.
_____________________________________________________

There is something inherently wrong with using " Any argument that you can" to win, rather than actual fact based analysis. Particularly with an issue as potentially dangerous as intoxication in the workplace.


I am guessing that a lot of the people here ranting against random drug tests, would be the first people to blame the company and sue the crap out of them if drunk *** Billy Bob ran over them with a forklift while they were putting together first aid kits at whatever factory the temp agency sent them to.

 

[Ziltoid]

First of all you ( politicians really, but whatever) SHOULD NOT have a say in what someone is paid on the bottom end. If someone doesn't want to work for what I pay, they are free to look elsewhere.

Second of all, the argument used to support minimum wage is that it keeps employers from being able to keep wages low "Collectively". Which is a a ridiculous argument, nevertheless, your argument for capping out wages has no logical reason. It is motivated by greed and lust after something someone else owns.

I'm betting your favorite bass player makes tons of money, yet somehow I doubt that you are advocating taking anything from him. I am also willing to bet you are ranting against companies like Apple while responding to this thread on an I phone someone else bought for you. lol

Because Rawls.

 

[Floyd Eye]

Actually, YES................

There are many jobs now that require you to be nicotine free, and do test for it.

This is due largely to insurance companies. This is also something which the current crop of leaders supports. You will see significant gaps in premiums paid by smokers and non smokers. There will be no equal rights for them and I am willing to bet money that most of the anti testing folks in this thread fully support it.