Drug Testing in the Work Place

Started by rjs246, January 16, 2008, 09:41:44 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

rjs246

So here's the thing, Dio. I won't get fired. I just won't get to work on this project. I risk nothing and accomplish nothing by saying no especially since I know I'll pass. It's funny because that absence of repercussion actually makes me think I'll probably just take the piss, whereas if my job were on the line I'd be far more likely to put my foot down.

*EDIT* Oh hell that's probably bullshtein. I honestly have no idea what I'm going to do here.
Is rjs gonna have to choke a bitch?

Let them eat bootstraps.

Diomedes

Either way, you're doomed.  Drink to forget.
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

rjs246

Is rjs gonna have to choke a bitch?

Let them eat bootstraps.

Rome

The fact that you're even considering bowing to those fargers angers me a little.   I'd probably do the same, though, if I were faced with the same decision, especially if I had nothing to worry about.

Diomedes

It's a tough decision.  Everybody gotta eat.

I opted out of that system and now I make a lot less money as a result.  I won't take the test, but I can't really fault people who do..most of them are trapped.  While it's true you can always look for work elsewhere, it's also true that we need food now, and not later.  And the next guy is probably gonna try to make you piss too.

And even those who aren't trapped, well shtein you gotta make decisions in life.  It's awful hard to judge someone on a point like this. 
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

ice grillin you

i took the test like a little bitch to get in the govt
i can take a phrase thats rarely heard...flip it....now its a daily word

igy gettin it done like warrick

im the board pharmacist....always one step above yous

Geowhizzer

Some jobs have to have testing, like some of the ones mentioned here (machine operators, etc.)


I tend to agree with the general thought that unless safety is an issue, drug testing isn't necessary and shouldn't be done just on a whim.


Of course, I just got re-fingerprinted for another background check, even though I've been in the job for 13 years.  All employees hired before 2004 had to be re-fingerprinted to put us in the system.

Wingspan

Quote from: Diomedes on January 16, 2008, 06:38:24 PM
I couldn't disagree with Wingnut more. 

Of course not. IIRC...you lost a job offer for this very reason not long before you sold your soul to the wife.
Connection Problems

Sorry, SMF was unable to connect to the database. This may be caused by the server being busy. Please try again later.

Diomedes

Quote from: ice grillin you on January 16, 2008, 07:43:34 PM
i took the test like a little bitch to get in the govt

you sat to pee, didn't you
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

Diomedes

Quote from: Wingspan on January 16, 2008, 08:00:46 PM
Quote from: Diomedes on January 16, 2008, 06:38:24 PM
I couldn't disagree with Wingnut more.

Of course not. IIRC...you lost a job offer for this very reason not long before you sold your soul to the wife.

You don't remember correctly.  I abstained in anticipation of the test, decided not to take the job--they needed a lot of travel, which I wasn't going to do on account of having sold my soul to my wife, who is incidentally better than your mom, continued to abstain in case I wanted any other job, decided against working in SAP ever again and to go non corporate insted, etc.

Your brain is too small to believe any of this of course.  To you, a drug user is a lying criminal addict.  Good for you.
There is considerable overlap between the intelligence of the smartest bears and the dumbest tourists." - Yosemite Park Ranger

Rome

You're only a criminal if you don't share.

phattymatty

every single one of you would take the piss in this position and it makes me laugh that some of you pretend you would take this moral stand with your job on the line. 

shorebird

It's not as easy as some think to cheat a piss test. The companies that do the testing have caught up to the companies making the drinks that clean you out. Diluted pee, pee that is the wrong color, has the wrong kinds of liquids in it, they look for all that. Only safe way is to stay clean for 4 weeks.

PoopyfaceMcGee

Quote from: Diomedes on January 16, 2008, 07:40:13 PM
It's a tough decision.  Everybody gotta eat.

I opted out of that system and now I make a lot less money as a result.  I won't take the test, but I can't really fault people who do..most of them are trapped.  While it's true you can always look for work elsewhere, it's also true that we need food now, and not later.  And the next guy is probably gonna try to make you piss too.

And even those who aren't trapped, well shtein you gotta make decisions in life.  It's awful hard to judge someone on a point like this. 

lock the thread - Dio wins.

Cerevant

Stop with the bullshtein about government agencies...this is a matter of discrimination, and there are plenty of anti-discrimination laws on the books with no government agency to back them up.

I think it is the consensus here that testing for illegal drugs is OK and testing for alcohol is not because the drugs are illegal.  I am also fine about testing in the case of a workplace injury if there is probable cause - just like getting a breathalyzer / blood test when there is an accident / traffic stop.

What bothers me about workplace testing is the "guilty unless proven innocent" mentality that surrounds it.  If it is a matter of companies protecting themselves from "criminals", why don't we just let the police do random drug tests for all citizens?  Why not submit to random home searches?  Why don't we let the police monitor our bank accounts and credit cards for suspicious activity?  Why do they need warrants to tap your phone, or to read your mail?  If you aren't breaking the law, you have nothing to hide, right?
An ad hominem fallacy consists of asserting that someone's argument is wrong and/or he is wrong to argue at all purely because of something discreditable/not-authoritative about the person or those persons cited by him rather than addressing the soundness of the argument itself.