IT job without a drug test possible

[Soybomb]

Originally posted by: Sundog

Originally posted by: Soybomb

Originally posted by: Thegonagle
Hospitals, airlines, railroads, bus companies, etc. (any place where the employees are responsible for other people's lives) probably should test for drug use.

Home Depot and Walmart OTOH? I couldn't care less. As long as someone can say "It's in isle four, that will be $15.77," they're doing a fine job as far as I'm concerned.

So the stoner in home depot can cruise over me in the forklift but a pot head fixing a printer in the hospital is dangerous?

Not true at all. Home Depot Corporate has a companywide drug testing policy for every single employee. This is posted on every enterance to the store. Next....

Okay the guy in walmart cruising over me with a man lift then. Its a hypothetical example, pick a company with heavy equipment and no testing and one with none and testing.

Brainiac, here's a hint, they have a lot of drugs in hospitals.

How about other companies then? I would be willing to be its more about the economics of the situation and getting a lower insurance premium.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: gistech1978

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Sundog
And you are talking about a "freedom" that is not federally protected in the same way as say one's political affiliation.

I thought the "innocent until proven guilty" thing only applied to the whole justice system thing.

ah, once again.
corporations trumping the 'whole justice system thing'.

:thumbsup:

They're entirely different entities. One has nothing to do with the other, unless someone is pressing charges.

And yes, corporations are more important than you. Haven't you been paying attention?

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: gistech1978

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Sundog
And you are talking about a "freedom" that is not federally protected in the same way as say one's political affiliation.

I thought the "innocent until proven guilty" thing only applied to the whole justice system thing.

ah, once again.
corporations trumping the 'whole justice system thing'.

:thumbsup:

Employers aren't trumping anything. They're simply making sure certain prerequisites are met before hiring a prospective candidate for a job. Drug tests can certainly be one of those prerequisites.

 

[Kilrsat]

Originally posted by: Soybomb

Originally posted by: Kilrsat

Originally posted by: Soybomb

Originally posted by: dirtboy
So they're supposed to hire you and then find out later when you come in high up on drugs and destroy their network that they should have checked to see if you're a drug user.

If you don't like their policies, then don't work there.

Next thing you'll whine about is that it's an invasion of privacy if they want you to prove that you can do the job you're applying for. :roll:

I'm planning not to hence the post asking what tech companies are like on the whole on the issue.

You don't see the difference between someone's activities at home and if they have the required job skills?

Maybe random screenings at home to see if someone's all "high up on" alcohol and will come in and destroy the network or have performance issues are called for.

Many companies test for alcohol as well (think trucking). There goes your argument.

Not really (The Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991 requires drug and alcohol testing of safety-sensitive transportation employees in aviation, trucking, railroads, mass transit, pipelines and other transportation industries.) If your job involves heavy machinery or national security I could certainly see testing as being required for the safety of others or the nation. If your job involves bad nic's and dying harddrives, I still see it as an invasion of privacy. I was pointing out alcohol because for this job, thats not tested for despite it being no more/less involved with on the job performance than someone using other drugs when they're not at work.

You agree to terms of employment when you take a job. Being a drug-user is not a protected class in this country and neither is being an alcoholic. Both are fine reasons for firing someone. If they wish to discriminate against drug users, it is the company's decision. If they miss out on many qualified candidates and the company goes down hill, then they may change company policy.

However, you are still free to decide who you wish to employ and who you do not wish to employ. Just as you are free to decide where you wish to attempt to gain employment. That's the beauty of the system. It is as much their business as they want to make it their business because many companies feel that even outside of work, you still represent the company. Their image is on the line as long as you are on their payroll.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Anubis

Originally posted by: Sundog

Originally posted by: Anubis
I HAVE TO GET FINGERPRINTED AND PAY FOR MY OWN FEDERAL BACKGROUND CHECK TO SUBSTUTITE TEACH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|:|

Damn straight you do. My kid is going to school soon so I also want 3 strands of hair every month, weekly fingernail clippings, bimonthly pee in a cup and what else can I think up????

i know your kidding but its a bit much, background check is fine, everyplace does it, BUT why shoudl I have to pay for it???? also i really dont think that fingerprining me matters because teh fusking background check will find anything anyway,

i really just dont want my prints on file EVER

Look for another job.

My finger prints are on file EVERYWHERE.

i have been looking ALL SUMMER, i just need a damn job till Feb, im going back to school then and just need to make some money, but NO ONE WILL HIRE ME!!

whoever said that getting a Job with a Degree in Physics would be easy was smoking crack

No thanks, I don't want the fries.

 

[Sundog]

Originally posted by: Soybomb
Okay the guy in walmart cruising over me with a man lift then. Its a hypothetical example, pick a company with heavy equipment and no testing and one with none and testing.

Ahhhh...all I have to say to that is FVCK Walmart.:|

Goodnight all.....I am tired and need to go pee in a cup tomorrow morning.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Sundog

Originally posted by: Soybomb
Okay the guy in walmart cruising over me with a man lift then. Its a hypothetical example, pick a company with heavy equipment and no testing and one with none and testing.

Ahhhh...all I have to say to that is FVCK Walmart.:|

Goodnight all.....I am tired and need to go pee in a cup tomorrow morning.

If they insist on watching, ask them to hold the cup.

 

[KLin]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Sundog

Originally posted by: Soybomb
Okay the guy in walmart cruising over me with a man lift then. Its a hypothetical example, pick a company with heavy equipment and no testing and one with none and testing.

Ahhhh...all I have to say to that is FVCK Walmart.:|

Goodnight all.....I am tired and need to go pee in a cup tomorrow morning.

If they insist on watching, ask them to hold the cup.

"woops, sorry about peeing on your hand. Woops, sorry again!"

 

[lobadobadingdong]

Originally posted by: gistech1978

Originally posted by: lobadobadingdong
I don't think it's an invasion of privacy, but can help "weed" out users who could cause problems down the road.

isnt that what the interview process is supposed to do?

if the company is so hellbent on testing why interview person A, offer them the job and THEN make them take a UA?
that seems a tad counter productive, heaven forbid.

so this person was obviously good enough to get the job in the interview, but since person A's piss is cloudy, so long.

make them piss in the cup beforehand to 'weed' out the 'users who could cause problems down the road'

so you only get the good applicants who get sh!tfaced drunk everynight.

the interview process is to find out if someone might be compentent to do the job, It's nice for many businesses to say we have a drug free invironment, and be able to prove it, they can't say the previous thing if they employed crack heads, I'm talking about problems like adicts stealing money and the few rare instances where someone does come to work high/wasted.

I'm not saying it should be manditory, but if an employer decides to do it for whatever reason, I'm not against it, it's his/her business to run as he/she likes. if you don't want to take a drug screening then don't apply to the companies that have them as a requirement. it isn't that frikkin complicated.

 

[HonkeyDonk]

it's not a matter of invasion of privacy, and it's certainly not a matter of your "values/standards". I mean how are your own values compromised if you go take a drug test that you know you have nothing to fear?

The reason for a drug test is so that the company can cover their own asses. Do you know what kind of troubles they could get in if something happened at the workplace and it involved an employee and his/her drugs?

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Soybomb
I just finished up my BS and don't have what I think is too terrible job experience. I'm ultimately looking for a network or unix system administrator position. So far I haven't looked too hard and been enjoying my old job and some time off but decided its time to start looking for something a bit better so I can pay off some loans before I go back for another degree. Anyway I live in a rural area so tech jobs aren't everywhere. One of my friends gave me a heads up about a job with a hospital she works at but they require a blood/urine sample for drug testing before employment. I've never even smoked pot so I don't worry about the results but I think thats an invasion of privacy and frankly irrelevant to the job. If it was a job with security clearance needs or using heavy equipment maybe. To restore a raid array and add users to the lan, no.

I partially feel like I'm crazy to turn down a decent job for such a reasonably trivial matter, but I also hate not following my values. I'm just curious what the chances are of getting my dream job in a tech company like google, yahoo, amazon, microsoft, etc is with this thinking. I like to think of tech companies being a little more liberal with employment rules and not being this invasive into someone's personal life, but maybe thats just wishful thinking.

Companies don't want their employees smoking out on their lunch break and coming back to set up the SAN. On a related note I had to take a drug test the other day for a job I just got, and I was having a hard time peeing because I hadn't had anything to drink in a while (I normally carry around a 1.5 liter dasani bottle with me) and this large black nurse knocks on the door and asks "you ok honey? need some help in there" I'm like "ermm uhh excuse me? I mean...no....look here's the damn cup back" was a little weirded out by that...

 

[Soybomb]

Originally posted by: HonkeyDonk
it's not a matter of invasion of privacy, and it's certainly not a matter of your "values/standards". I mean how are your own values compromised if you go take a drug test that you know you have nothing to fear?

The reason for a drug test is so that the company can cover their own asses. Do you know what kind of troubles they could get in if something happened at the workplace and it involved an employee and his/her drugs?

Same reason I don't want people listening in on my phone conversations even if I have nothing to hide.
http://archive.aclu.org/issues/worker/legkit3.html shows some thinking similar to what I have on the issue.

Yes, its a liability that comes with running a business, you buy insurance.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Soybomb

Originally posted by: HonkeyDonk
it's not a matter of invasion of privacy, and it's certainly not a matter of your "values/standards". I mean how are your own values compromised if you go take a drug test that you know you have nothing to fear?

The reason for a drug test is so that the company can cover their own asses. Do you know what kind of troubles they could get in if something happened at the workplace and it involved an employee and his/her drugs?

Same reason I don't want people listening in on my phone conversations even if I have nothing to hide.
http://archive.aclu.org/issues/worker/legkit3.html shows some thinking similar to what I have on the issue.

Yes, its a liability that comes with running a business, you buy insurance.

They limit their liability and their insurance payment SIGNIFICANTLY by requiring you to take a drug test, not to mention the productivity issues. I'm not gonna pay someone to come in and veg out for an hour after doin a wake and bake. Having you pee in a cup is quite a bit different than allowing people to listen to your phone conversations, it is within a very narrowly defined spectrum, they take your urine and look for specific drugs, whereas listening on the phone with you they could listen in on anything from you talking with your grandmother to you planning out a murder. I would never let anyone tap my phone or search my car/home/persons without a warrant, but a UA is not a problem for me.

 

[Eli]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It's not an invasion of privacy, IMO. But I've never had a piss test.

How is it not an invasion of privacy?????

Last time I checked, what you or I do in our own homes is private and it is absolutely none of my employers business.

If I come to work 10 minutes early, leave 10 minutes late and do my job 110% of what's expected, THAT is all that matters. It shouldn't matter if I like to relax to a bowl after work, just like it doesen't matter if you like to relax to a beer after work, or God forbid.. smoke cigarettes while at work!

:roll::roll::roll: <--- that's to the whole idea in general, not you per se.

Now, comming to work under the influence is(and should be) universally frowned upon, and anybody who does that deserves to be canned.

 

[CarpeDeo]

Well- it is a hospital after all . . . can't blame them for wanting their employees to be of good health.

 

[brxndxn]

I smoked pot a few times one month (I hardly ever smoke it unless I'm in hometown with my buddies) right after I got hired at an engineering firm for a summer job. Surprisingly, I showed up one day and they handed me papers, dismissed me from work, and told me to take a drug test required for every new hire. I figured 'what the hell' and went and took the test anyway. I dunno if they just didn't care about the results or I passed, but I never heard anything else about it. I didn't get fired and I was never told whether or not I 'passed' the drug test.

I remember asking the girl watching me piss if I could fail just by being around friends smoking. She said, 'It's a drug-abuse test; not a drug-use test.'

So, from that, I guess you can pass a drug test if you use in moderation.



I agree that drug tests are a violation of privacy, though. Pot wears off just like alcohol.. If I get high the night before work, I should be treated just the same as if I got drunk the night before...

 

[thawolfman]

Holy sh!t just take a piss and stfu!

Gawd damn!

 

[Nebor]

Originally posted by: thawolfman
Holy sh!t just take a piss and stfu!

Gawd damn!

Exactly. Or don't work there. No one's making you work there. THey could require you to stand on your head all day long too. You either accept it or don't work there. But jesus, STFU.

 

[DAGTA]

I didn't think drug testing was so common. I've had 10 jobs in my life so far and I've never been asked to take a drug test.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Eli

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
It's not an invasion of privacy, IMO. But I've never had a piss test.

How is it not an invasion of privacy?????

Last time I checked, what you or I do in our own homes is private and it is absolutely none of my employers business.

If I come to work 10 minutes early, leave 10 minutes late and do my job 110% of what's expected, THAT is all that matters. It shouldn't matter if I like to relax to a bowl after work, just like it doesen't matter if you like to relax to a beer after work, or God forbid.. smoke cigarettes while at work!

:roll::roll::roll: <--- that's to the whole idea in general, not you per se.

Now, comming to work under the influence is(and should be) universally frowned upon, and anybody who does that deserves to be canned.

Unfortunately the world doesn't quite work like that. Pot is illegal in some areas, drug scandals (especially at hospitals) can be a pain in the butt, and some people decide they need these things at work.

Do I think drug testing is a good thing? Not for most jobs. Do I think it's a violation of privacy? Not when _your time_ can affect the job.

I haven't had to take one for a job. Guess I'm lucky. Depending on the circumstances, I can see myself not taking a job because of a drug test.

 

[clamum]

Come on, drugs are evil, they'll make you fail in life and at work. It's only proper they drug test people to weed out these fvcking druggies.

 

[CChaos]

Awww, how cute, an idealist.

 

[Viper GTS]

You guys crack me up.

Invasion of privacy, oh no.

You have a simple choice - Take the drug test or don't.

It makes absolutely no difference to them, there are 10 more people out there that will take the drug test.

An invasion of privacy would be coming into your home at random &amp; forcing you to take a drug test.

An optional drug test as a pre-requisite for employment is called insurance.

That being said, if you insist on being a baby about it there are lots of jobs that don't require drug tests. Refusing to take a drug test for the sake of your own pride (thus forfeiting a job) is just stupid.

Viper GTS

 

[purbeast0]

i was shocked to find out that my first 'real' job didn't make me take a piss test. i just started this job the past week, and they did not require me to take one. it's a 40hr/wk fulltime w/benefits job. but when i worked at best buy, they made me take a piss test. go figure.

and btw, i am clean anyways .

 

[Zombie]

Originally posted by: Soybomb
I just finished up my BS and don't have what I think is too terrible job experience. I'm ultimately looking for a network or unix system administrator position. So far I haven't looked too hard and been enjoying my old job and some time off but decided its time to start looking for something a bit better so I can pay off some loans before I go back for another degree. Anyway I live in a rural area so tech jobs aren't everywhere. One of my friends gave me a heads up about a job with a hospital she works at but they require a blood/urine sample for drug testing before employment. I've never even smoked pot so I don't worry about the results but I think thats an invasion of privacy and frankly irrelevant to the job. If it was a job with security clearance needs or using heavy equipment maybe. To restore a raid array and add users to the lan, no.

I partially feel like I'm crazy to turn down a decent job for such a reasonably trivial matter, but I also hate not following my values. I'm just curious what the chances are of getting my dream job in a tech company like google, yahoo, amazon, microsoft, etc is with this thinking. I like to think of tech companies being a little more liberal with employment rules and not being this invasive into someone's personal life, but maybe thats just wishful thinking.

It is a hospital job after all so I am sure they wanna make sure they are not hiring junkies who will have easy access to drugs in the hospital.

Even if it was not a hospital it's their choice to send you in for drug test it's your choice to apply for a job there.