Drug Testing

Ms. Haiku

I guess this should go on MT, but I like AET better

For or against drug testing for employment of non-criminals?

Against (check)

Poncier

I guess it depends on what the job is.
Working with kids or operating heavy machinery or such, I'd have to say yes.

lalalalaaaaaaaa

Against for both criminal and non-criminal.

chromiam

For

Ms. Haiku

Saturnal wrote:

Against for both criminal and non-criminal.

Yep, I should clarify, thanks for bringing it up. I could see how my original post was a little confusing. I meant for criminals who are attending programs as part of sentence. In those cases I'm for drug testing. So, the better question:

Drug testing for employment - for or against?

elmer

Poncier wrote:

I guess it depends on what the job is.

and if you're a drug user or not.

Ms. Haiku

Anyone have statistics for about 20 years on if drug testing has improved employee productivity and reduced cost?

Poncier

elmer wrote:

and if you're a drug user or not.

Clearly you're going to see drug users answer "against" and non users answer "for"...this thread might as well ask "do you do drugs?"

reversedarwinism

Against testing for marijuana.

For testing of other substances.

chromiam

Ms. Haiku wrote:

Anyone have statistics for about 20 years on if drug testing has improved employee productivity and reduced cost?

it certainly reduces the cost of liability insurance which companies have to carry and pay

lalalalaaaaaaaa

Ms. Haiku wrote:

Yep, I should clarify, thanks for bringing it up. I could see how my original post was a little confusing. I meant for criminals who are attending programs as part of sentence. In those cases I'm for drug testing. So, the better question:

Drug testing for employment - for or against?

Yep, definitely against. If someone has a drug problem, it's usually very obvious. Drug tests can't really confirm that. All drug tests tell you is that someone has either done drugs recently or they haven't....or they eat lots of poppy seed bagels.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

i am all for drug testing in the workplace...

pre-employment and random.....

Ms. Haiku

Poncier wrote:

Clearly you're going to see drug users answer "against" and non users answer "for"...this thread might as well ask "do you do drugs?"

My blood is so clean my oldest sister already told me she would want my organs if she needed them. That's not the type of conversation a person has every day, eh?

elmer

Poncier wrote:

Clearly you're going to see drug users answer "against" and non users answer "for"...this thread might as well ask "do you do drugs?"

er yeah,haha.

The testing should be random and clearly certain professions have more need for it than others. I worked for a rail company and whilst there was no testing policy for contractors a blood test was required before they took anybody on.
Are you considering Alcohol? I would think the amount some guy bladders the night before has relevance if he is a......cab driver.

rearviewmiror

Down to the job, but for most? Massive invasion of privacy. This country is slowly stripping the rights of all its citizens.

Heineken Helen

Poncier wrote:

Clearly you're going to see drug users answer "against" and non users answer "for"...this thread might as well ask "do you do drugs?"

Nope, I don't take any drugs and I'm STRONGLY against... it's one of THE worst invasions of privacy that your employer should have absolutely no right to.

If the drugs are affecting your performance as an employee, your boss will have more than enough reason to get rid of you... if they're not, well then they've no feckin need to know

I really don't understand how people can be for this kinda thing there is absolutely NO logic behind it.

chromiam

Heineken Helen wrote:

Nope, I don't take any drugs and I'm STRONGLY against... it's one of THE worst invasions of privacy that your employer should have absolutely no right to.

If the drugs are affecting your performance as an employee, your boss will have more than enough reason to get rid of you... if they're not, well then they've no feckin need to know

I really don't understand how people can be for this kinda thing there is absolutely NO logic behind it.

In my line of work, pre employment drug testing helps prevent me and my fellow employees from being hurt, maimed or killed while on the job.

I would suspect the same is true in Speedy's line of work.

Poncier

chromiam wrote:

In my line of work, pre employment drug testing helps prevent me and my fellow employees from being hurt, maimed or killed while on the job.

I would suspect the same is true in Speedy's line of work.

Exactly...and would anyone want to send their kids to a day care where the employees are possibly on drugs, putting the children at risk?

Heineken Helen

Poncier wrote:

Exactly...and would anyone want to send their kids to a day care where the employees are possibly on drugs, putting the children at risk?

how are the kids at risk if the employees aren't ON drugs during the working hours?

Poncier

Heineken Helen wrote:

how are the kids at risk if the employees aren't ON drugs during the working hours?

How do you know that if they aren't tested?

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Poncier wrote:

Exactly...and would anyone want to send their kids to a day care where the employees are possibly on drugs, putting the children at risk?

quit thinking logically........

Poncier

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

quit thinking logically........

I know, its frowned upon here.
Hehehe

HermanBloom

For

Heineken Helen

Poncier wrote:

How do you know that if they aren't tested?

well if you're doing your job properly as a boss, you'd know your employees aren't on drugs during working hours :rolleyes: maybe search them on the way INTO work? Would that make ya feel better?

See it's all you 'logical' thinkers that will have all of us searched, drug tested and whatever else... I'll pee in the toilet not a fucking cup!

Heineken Helen

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

quit thinking logically........

I know you like to make it seem like it's beyond you to have an adult debate and discussion on anything... but can't you at least TRY for once? :cool:

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Heineken Helen wrote:

I know you like to make it seem like it's beyond you to have an adult debate and discussion on anything... but can't you at least TRY for once? :cool:

go find someone else to insult today helen......

Poncier

Heineken Helen wrote:

well if you're doing your job properly as a boss, you'd know your employees aren't on drugs during working hours :rolleyes:

Tell me honsetly that you can tell someone is on drugs just by looking at them. In obvious instances yes, but by no means in many cases. So lets say a caregiver has smoked a fat doob on the way to work at the Thai Stick Day Care and their reaction time is just a little slow, and baby Seamus falls into the kiddie pool while they are eating some Hohos and by the time they think about the situation and react, baby Seamus has drowned.
Not good for baby Seamus' parents.

Heineken Helen

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

go find someone else to insult today helen......

I don't recall insulting you before but you too often just post a 'smart' comment in response putting the person down who's only trying to have an actual debate on the topic. If ya can't take it...... cos god knows ya GIVE it often enough :rolleyes:

Anyway I'm not going off topic. If you've a problem pm me.

SPEEDY MCCREADY

Heineken Helen wrote:

I don't recall insulting you before but you too often just post a 'smart' comment in response putting the person down who's only trying to have an actual debate on the topic. If ya can't take it...... cos god knows ya GIVE it often enough :rolleyes:

Anyway I'm not going off topic. If you've a problem pm me.

go find someone else to insult today helen.....

chromiam

Poncier wrote:

Tell me honsetly that you can tell someone is on drugs just by looking at them. In obvious instances yes, but by no means in many cases. So lets say a caregiver has smoked a fat doob on the way to work at the Thai Stick Day Care and their reaction time is just a little slow, and baby Seamus falls into the kiddie pool while they are eating some Hohos and by the time they think about the situation and react, baby Seamus has drowned.
Not good for baby Seamus' parents.

or insert chemical operator for caregiver and they misread a chemical name and then cause toxic fuses or an explosion to occur.... not good for me or people within miles of the plant.

Heineken Helen

Poncier wrote:

Tell me honsetly that you can tell someone is on drugs just by looking at them. In obvious instances yes, but by no means in many cases. So lets say a caregiver has smoked a fat doob on the way to work at the Thai Stick Day Care and their reaction time is just a little slow, and baby Seamus falls into the kiddie pool while they are eating some Hohos and by the time they think about the situation and react, baby Seamus has drowned.
Not good for baby Seamus' parents.

well there would be more than one employee responsible for the kids... and yes, you CAN tell by looking at someone. I've lived with my fair share of stoners.

I know a few people working with delinquent kids who can only get through the day by smoking when they come home to chill out. These people get threatened and abused on a daily basis, sometimes several times a day... who's gonna tell them they can't smoke a spliff when they get home?