Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Do employers really need random drug testimg? Do

  1. #1
    Real American™ nam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    24,377
    Rep Power
    144732

    Do employers really need random drug testimg? Do

    I can't really see why random testing is needed in a place of business.

    First, it seems wasteful. Why pay for drug testing someone you have no reason at all to suspect the employee? It seems to me, employers would be better off only testing those employees who have given management reason to suspect drug use.

    Second, why would testing need to be done in the first place? If someone is doing their job poorly fire them, suspend them, whatever. You don't need drug testing to know whether your employee is bad at his job. If someone is doing their job well, then what does it matter that they also may be on drugs? Drug testing, and mostly, random drug testing does not seem to be necessary.
    If you are not willing to fall flat on your face, then the only thing you will have is a pretty face.

  2. #2
    Full Sponsor Bonadonna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,339
    Rep Power
    23885
    I agree with you except in the case where public safety is involved. For example, a public transit driver...you wouldn't want to wait for evidence of poor performance to let them go. When there are lives at stake, a higher standard needs to be held.

  3. #3
    argh Nansel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Canuckistan
    Posts
    25,482
    Rep Power
    286927
    in Canada it's only legal in very certain circumstances. And the company has to prove it's necessary. I have never once heard of someone being tested pre-employment. The bar is extremely high legally for a company to be able to do that.

    And that's as it should be, IMO. I'm appalled when I read of Americans getting tested as a matter of course. What an intrusion of privacy.

  4. #4
    Shrieking Violet Sprockey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    I Wish I Knew
    Posts
    103,217
    Rep Power
    715793
    I agree that it is an intrusion of privacy for most people and kind of job.

    My oldest works in the pharmacy dept for a hospital.
    It makes sense to make sure he is "clean" before allowing him access to a multitude of drugs.

  5. #5
    I flunked typing coachgrrl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    20,904
    Rep Power
    503109
    In the hospital we do a drug test on hire and sign a consent they can test anytime. I'm fine with that. Over the course of my career I've seen several nurses and doctors caught for stealing drugs.

  6. #6
    Nihongo dame desu villanelle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    12,487
    Rep Power
    349128
    I think it makes a lot of sense in some jobs. Most office work or retail? Nah.

  7. #7
    Premier Sponsor
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    1,260
    Rep Power
    40331
    My husband's last job had mandatory random drug testing. His manager's "randomly" selected him at a higher frequency than other employees because they new he would be clean and didn't want to deal with the hassle of someone coming up positive.

  8. #8
    Moderator purplekitty's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    85,587
    Rep Power
    648791
    I've only had to be randomly drug tested when it was mandated due to public safety. Working at the nuclear power plant, working in customer service handling gas emergency calls, etc.

    It's random for a number of reasons, the main reason being employees are represented by a union. Plus, people did test positive without management suspecting anything.

    If management did have cause, then they could pull specific employees, but they'd need some clear evidence to do so.

  9. #9
    Full Sponsor maurinsky's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    27,608
    Rep Power
    376963
    I've had to take a drug test to get previous jobs, but I've never worked anywhere where we could get randomly tested.

    My cousin was a train conductor, and he had regular tests.

  10. #10
    Real American™ nam's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    24,377
    Rep Power
    144732
    Quote Originally Posted by purplekitty View Post
    Plus, people did test positive without management suspecting anything.
    Right. Which, in all likelihood, means those people were not impaired at work. If you are not high at work, why is it any business of your employer that you happen to have drugs still in your system? A positive test does not indicate that one is presently high, or that one was high at the time the specimen was collected. The employer's only interest in your drug use is whether you are impaired at work. If management didn't suspect anything, then the employee's job performance must not have been hindered, and management's interests were not interfered with.
    If you are not willing to fall flat on your face, then the only thing you will have is a pretty face.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •