I've always been a bit puzzled by drug testing. If its illegal for the police to search a car or home without a warrant why is it ok for corporations to enforce drug testing? Just curious.
Is drug testing a violation of privacy?
- Thread starter Arkitech
- Start date
I wish schools would do it to those who participate in extra-circicular activites. No one is forcing you take to a drug test. When you applied for the company you've must have signed some legal docs, or atleast I did.
If drug testing is a condition of employment, you have nothing to say about it. You either take the job and deal with the drug testing, or you go work somewhere else. That's all there is to it.
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
A company is legally liable for the actions of it's employees. If you have a delivery driver that is doped up on whatever substance and goes out and plows through an intersection taking out a family of 4, it's not the driver that is getting sued - it's the company.
It's in their own best interest to weed out the trash. Obviously there is a line where drug testing is pointless. Really...does anyone care if a dishwasher or busboy tokes up after work? I don't. And neither does most employers.
It's in their own best interest to weed out the trash. Obviously there is a line where drug testing is pointless. Really...does anyone care if a dishwasher or busboy tokes up after work? I don't. And neither does most employers.
No. You have a choice to let them drug test you or not. If you let them, then they have your consent, and you acknowledge that it's no longer private information. On the other hand, you can refuse to take the drug test, and then they won't give you the test. However, they reserve the right to refuse to hire you.
Drug tests are the shiznit. Anybody who does not feel the same way is a hardcore heroin addict and should be an outcast of society.
No. A company has a right to protect its interests. If I own a business I don't want any losers to ruin what I work to build.
- Oct 28, 1999
- 62,484
- 8,345
- 126
I can't tell if that's sarcasm or not.
But it's exactly the problem with drug testing. Not all drugs are created legal...and not all drugs that are harmful are illegal.
I can have have 4 beers, still perfectly coherent, pass all field sobriety tests and only fail the BAC. But...I could pop two benadryls for allergies and be completely looped out of my mind and be two steps from unconscious but still be legal. And then...to completely throw a wrench in the fire I could smoke a single joint 2 weeks before the drug tests on a friday night when I don't work for 2 days and fail the test.
It just isn't a very consistent or "fair" testing policy. Any reasonable company will look at things on a per person basis and not make any rash judgements.
DrPizza
Administrator Elite Member Goat Whisperer
I'm still wondering though... if you came back and tested positive for marijuana, and got fired for using marijuana illegally, could you sue the employer for wrongful termination if in fact (and you could prove it) you had travelled on a vacation to a place where marijuana was legal and that's the only time and place you tried it?
SeaSerpent
Platinum Member
- Sep 24, 2001
- 2,613
- 4
- 81
I have never liked the fact that somebody could be a weekend toker and get busted for pot.
Example: Say Joe Blow smoked a joint Saturday night. He goes to work Monday and cuts his finger.
He goes in for a piss test and fails it.
To me, that is not right. I think they should have drug testing, but they should have tests that say weither or not you
are high at that moment. What somebody does on there off time should be up to them.
Example: Say Joe Blow smoked a joint Saturday night. He goes to work Monday and cuts his finger.
He goes in for a piss test and fails it.
To me, that is not right. I think they should have drug testing, but they should have tests that say weither or not you
are high at that moment. What somebody does on there off time should be up to them.
The point is the company does not want anyone working for them that smokes pot so even if you travelled to a place where it is legal you still fail the requirements of employment......the company is not judging the legality of pot, legal or not they don't want a pothead working for them and that is their choice/right.
UglyCasanova
Lifer
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
UglyCasanova
Lifer
- Mar 25, 2001
- 19,275
- 1,361
- 126
DrPizza asked a legit question, say you went to Amsterdam and toked it up a few times. Would this make you a pothead? What about the guy that smokes on weekends? Pothead? Or what about the guy that has a glass of wine every night? Alchoholic?
The minute they develop an Integrity & Honesty Test for Upper Management is the minute I start peeing in a bottle for an APPLICATION.
The presumption of guilt is anthetical to "The American Way".
It's a pre-emptive strike, in the manner of the "Neo-Cons".
If there is an accident is the time to test. If your policy is "No drugs " as a condition of employment, it is acceptable to expect random un-announced testing. THEN, there would be grounds for termination with prejudice, thus the exposure to liability would be minimized, by placing the responsibility where it rests, with the individual.
Just my opinion, though. I work for myself.
The presumption of guilt is anthetical to "The American Way".
It's a pre-emptive strike, in the manner of the "Neo-Cons".
If there is an accident is the time to test. If your policy is "No drugs " as a condition of employment, it is acceptable to expect random un-announced testing. THEN, there would be grounds for termination with prejudice, thus the exposure to liability would be minimized, by placing the responsibility where it rests, with the individual.
Just my opinion, though. I work for myself.
1. Compares to making people on the street present their ID for whatever. They shouldn't be forced to present their ID without a good cause.
2. Compares to FedEx requiring ID to claim your package. You don't have to show them your ID if you don't want to claim your package.
Amused
Elite Member
- Apr 14, 2001
- 57,525
- 20,167
- 146
Bingo.
No one is forcing you to work for that company, therefore no one is forcing you to take a drug test.
Manditory drug testing in public schools is a much better example of a GOVERNMENT invasion of privacy. (That's all the Constitution protects us from)
alkemyst
No Lifer
- Feb 13, 2001
- 83,769
- 19
- 81
It is an invasion of privacy, however, one you have agreed to.
I do believe they cannot start drug testing after you are hired unless they give notice to that effect or it was stated in the companies HR guidelines / employee manual.
I know a few of the companies I have worked for did not actively screen for drugs, but had a clause that the employee will allow the company to request a drug screening at any time.
Å
I do believe they cannot start drug testing after you are hired unless they give notice to that effect or it was stated in the companies HR guidelines / employee manual.
I know a few of the companies I have worked for did not actively screen for drugs, but had a clause that the employee will allow the company to request a drug screening at any time.
Å
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter