Pre-Employment Drug Screening and the Paranoia of False Positives

[1001001]

Pre-Employment drug testing is pointless and stupid. It just feeds paranoia, placates funders and insurance companies, lines the pockets of drug testing companies, and does absolutely nothing for public safety.

The example of the surgeon is complete BS. Unless you're going to test every surgeon, every day, it is useless. The most dangerous drugs are out of your system in 48-72 hours.

To me there is a bigger, constitutional issue: are you really ready to give a private company or government agency the right to search your body for evidence of a crime without a warrant? Really? Under what probable cause? The cops don't even have that kind of power.

The last time an employer wanted to search my blood for drugs as a condition of employment, I asked to see his tax returns for the past 5 years:

"After all, tax fraud is a big problem in America, costing us billions a year, which leads to lower levels of public services like firemen and policemen. It is important to me to know that I'm not working for someone who is stealing from the American people, and making us all less safe. I'm sure you'd be glad to turn those over to me, you know, to prove to me you're not breaking the law, right?"

 

[Snaploud]

I just took the drug screen. They don't have a place to write down your prescription medications. Their procedure is apparently to call me if the test comes back positive, and that is when I would discuss any prescriptions that might have impacted the results.

I should get the call tomorrow if there are any issues.

Best of luck to you!

Thanks, Robert.

By the way, I'm in the accounting/auditing industry, so I won't be flying any airplanes. However, the company does do contract work for state governments.

 

[Scout101]

racist and fascist? how?

It's a police-state procedure, not worthy of a liberal democracy. And the mention of "them welfare leeches" has racist overtones more often than not.

Bingo.

To be clear: you heard about 'welfare leeches', thought of black people, and because you assumed that everyone else made that same leap, THEY are racist? It seems clear YOU got there, but not sure it's automatic for everyone.

If you actually got a head count, probably more whites out gaming the system, anyway. And yes, I think of southern white-trash trailer parks. If they are white, and I'm white, think I'm clear on racism, though. Clasist, or Elitist perhaps, but not Racist...

 

[Relayer1]

Pre-Employment drug testing is pointless and stupid. It just feeds paranoia, placates funders and insurance companies, lines the pockets of drug testing companies, and does absolutely nothing for public safety.

To me there is a bigger, constitutional issue: are you really ready to give a private company or government agency the right to search your body for evidence of a crime without a warrant? Really? Under what probable cause? The cops don't even have that kind of power.

I can't really understand how this screenings are even legal. Police forces have the right to test people for illegal substances. Private citizens and companies? Not so much. Since when corporations can wield the powers reserved to the state? Can they raise their own taxes, too? Have their own army?

You want your surgeon removing the wrong kidney because he's high as a kite? You want your airline pilot drunk on your flight to Cleveland?

I'm all for it, especially when it is an industry entrusted with public safety, as mine is.

Is this a serious problem in places that don't drug test?

Not that I know of. Another poster mentioned Canada, and on this side of the pond I'm sure it is illegal at least in Italy (but I think also in other European countries). Any report of lots of drunken Canuck pilots and drugged European surgeons?

racist and fascist? how?

It's a police-state procedure, not worthy of a liberal democracy. And the mention of "them welfare leeches" has racist overtones more often than not.

I can only agree wholeheartedly with this. I would not take one on principle, and I know I'd pass....

 

[Lumi]

Race has nothing to do with anything in this thread. I can't even believe what I am reading here. This is ridiculous.

I know people who abuse the welfare system and spend all of the money they receive on drugs and booze. I've seen how many people do it, and every one of them that I know personally is of my very race. Where is the racism?

 

[clint g]

No one is forced to take a pre-employment drug test. If you want the job you take it. If you don't then you are free to leave. For it to be something close to "fascist" the government would have to go around and force the average citizen to take it whether they wanted to or not.

Your prospective employer wants to shove a frozen gherkin up your arse, to test your loyalty to the company. No one is forced to take a pre-employment ass-gherkining. If you want the job, you take it. If you don't, then you are free to leave. Sure, your family will starve and you will find yourself homeless, but if you want a job then it's perfectly fine to trade in your civil freedoms for it.

Now bend over and be a good employee.

If an ass-gherking is what I think it is, I don't think it's an apt comparison under sexual harassment laws

 

[Robert Maxwell]

It's a police-state procedure, not worthy of a liberal democracy. And the mention of "them welfare leeches" has racist overtones more often than not.

Bingo.

To be clear: you heard about 'welfare leeches', thought of black people, and because you assumed that everyone else made that same leap, THEY are racist? It seems clear YOU got there, but not sure it's automatic for everyone.

If you actually got a head count, probably more whites out gaming the system, anyway. And yes, I think of southern white-trash trailer parks. If they are white, and I'm white, think I'm clear on racism, though. Clasist, or Elitist perhaps, but not Racist...

It's not me jumping to conclusions, it's a white well-documented conservative strategy. They can't go around talking about "n*ggers" anymore, so they talk about "welfare." They can't talk about the "invasion of sp*cs," so they talk about "immigration." It's all a way of covering up the inherent bigotry in their platform. This isn't something I made up. It's quite common.

"Let's drug test welfare recipients" means "let's find a way to punish people who are disproportionately going to be poor minorities and rob them of their dignity."

The term for this is "dog whistle politics."

 

[iguana_tonante]

To be clear: you heard about 'welfare leeches', thought of black people, and because you assumed that everyone else made that same leap, THEY are racist? It seems clear YOU got there, but not sure it's automatic for everyone.

That's cute. It's also bullshit and you know it. However, racism is off-topic here. The fascism is more than enough to be disgusted.

Race has nothing to do with anything in this thread. I can't even believe what I am reading here. This is ridiculous.

Nice try, Republican girl. Now go back to Aunt Lydia and let her check if your uterus is Jesus-compliant.

If an ass-gherking is what I think it is, I don't think it's an apt comparison under sexual harassment laws

So sexual harassment is bad, but social black-mailing is good? They are both bad in my book.

 

[MacLeod]

Pre-Employment drug testing is pointless and stupid. It just feeds paranoia, placates funders and insurance companies, lines the pockets of drug testing companies, and does absolutely nothing for public safety.

The example of the surgeon is complete BS. Unless you're going to test every surgeon, every day, it is useless. The most dangerous drugs are out of your system in 48-72 hours.

To me there is a bigger, constitutional issue: are you really ready to give a private company or government agency the right to search your body for evidence of a crime without a warrant? Really? Under what probable cause? The cops don't even have that kind of power.

The last time an employer wanted to search my blood for drugs as a condition of employment, I asked to see his tax returns for the past 5 years:

"After all, tax fraud is a big problem in America, costing us billions a year, which leads to lower levels of public services like firemen and policemen. It is important to me to know that I'm not working for someone who is stealing from the American people, and making us all less safe. I'm sure you'd be glad to turn those over to me, you know, to prove to me you're not breaking the law, right?"

Maybe not in America, but in the UK for example, drugalysers could soon be rolled out. So if the Police for example puilled you over for erratic driving, they could test you. Just as they use you a breathalyser to test if they think your driving has been impared by alcohol. But erratic driving would no doubt be classed as probable cause.

 

[clint g]

If an ass-gherking is what I think it is, I don't think it's an apt comparison under sexual harassment laws

So sexual harassment is bad, but social black-mailing is good? They are both bad in my book.

It's comparing apples to oranges. Not having a crackhead in the workplace is good. There are tangible benefits to that. There's nothing but downsides to having sexual harassment.

Put another way ass rape =/= drug tests.

 

[Davros]

i'm actually all for this...

much like in Florida, i'm for drug screening before people receive benefits from the government as well... sick of seeing people around who can work, but chose not to and just claim money of the government and spend it on drugs and booze...

M

The problem is that they have found that they spend more on testing people than they save in denied benefits to users. And if a parent tests positive should their children's food or health care benefits be taken away? Or should even more money be spent making the children wards of the state?

 

[clint g]

It's not me jumping to conclusions, it's a white well-documented conservative strategy. They can't go around talking about "n*ggers" anymore, so they talk about "welfare." They can't talk about the "invasion of sp*cs," so they talk about "immigration." It's all a way of covering up the inherent bigotry in their platform. This isn't something I made up. It's quite common.

"Let's drug test welfare recipients" means "let's find a way to punish people who are disproportionately going to be poor minorities and rob them of their dignity."

The term for this is "dog whistle politics."

As a black man I'm more offended that you assume black = welfare more than anything else

 

[iguana_tonante]

Not having a crackhead in the workplace is good. There are tangible benefits to that.

Not having a company that is allowed to take the blood, piss, crap, and other bodily fluids of their employees is also a good thing.

It's not me jumping to conclusions, it's a white well-documented conservative strategy. They can't go around talking about "n*ggers" anymore, so they talk about "welfare." They can't talk about the "invasion of sp*cs," so they talk about "immigration." It's all a way of covering up the inherent bigotry in their platform. This isn't something I made up. It's quite common.

"Let's drug test welfare recipients" means "let's find a way to punish people who are disproportionately going to be poor minorities and rob them of their dignity."

The term for this is "dog whistle politics."

As a black man I'm more offended that you assume black = welfare more than anything else

As a black man, do you also fail to recognize policies that are specifically designed to disenfranchise other black people, or you recognize them and you just don't care as long as your taxes are low and your paranoia supported?

 

[Robert Maxwell]

It's not me jumping to conclusions, it's a white well-documented conservative strategy. They can't go around talking about "n*ggers" anymore, so they talk about "welfare." They can't talk about the "invasion of sp*cs," so they talk about "immigration." It's all a way of covering up the inherent bigotry in their platform. This isn't something I made up. It's quite common.

"Let's drug test welfare recipients" means "let's find a way to punish people who are disproportionately going to be poor minorities and rob them of their dignity."

The term for this is "dog whistle politics."

As a black man I'm more offended that you assume black = welfare more than anything else

It's not me assuming it, it's conservatives who design "welfare reform" policies around the understanding that they will disproportionately harm poor minorities.

 

[Hoser]

Pre-employment and "government benefit" drugs tests are like DRM on computer games, it only inconveniences (and potentially harms) the honest people, those it needs to find generally know the way around it.

 

[clint g]

Not having a crackhead in the workplace is good. There are tangible benefits to that.

Not having a company that is allowed to take the blood, piss, crap, and other bodily fluids of their employees is also a good thing.

It's not me jumping to conclusions, it's a white well-documented conservative strategy. They can't go around talking about "n*ggers" anymore, so they talk about "welfare." They can't talk about the "invasion of sp*cs," so they talk about "immigration." It's all a way of covering up the inherent bigotry in their platform. This isn't something I made up. It's quite common.

"Let's drug test welfare recipients" means "let's find a way to punish people who are disproportionately going to be poor minorities and rob them of their dignity."

The term for this is "dog whistle politics."

As a black man I'm more offended that you assume black = welfare more than anything else

As a black man, do you also fail to recognize policies that are specifically designed to disenfranchise other black people, or you recognize them and you just don't care as long as your taxes are low and your paranoia supported?

My taxes are anything but low. You'll have to get more specific on policies that disenfranchise other black people.

 

[Davros]

My taxes are anything but low.

If you live in the United States they are. They are at their lowest level in decades.

 

[clint g]

My taxes are anything but low.

If you live in the United States they are. They are at their lowest level in decades.

I also live in a part of the US that ranks among the highest in terms of cost of living and taxes.

 

[Davros]

My taxes are anything but low.

If you live in the United States they are. They are at their lowest level in decades.

I also live in a part of the US that ranks among the highest in terms of cost of living and taxes.

And those taxes are still at their lowest levels in decades. Probably higher than Mitt Romney pays but still at historic lows.

 

[clint g]

If you live in the United States they are. They are at their lowest level in decades.

I also live in a part of the US that ranks among the highest in terms of cost of living and taxes.

And those taxes are still at their lowest levels in decades. Probably higher than Mitt Romney pays but still at historic lows.

On the surface maybe. We have some of the highest sales, property, and gas taxes. We have high state and city income taxes. Our food is more expensive than in most places in the country. If you don't make 40k its almost impossible to survive here. There's alot more too it than just Federal income taxes and until you try to make a living here, you're not in a position to determine whether our taxes are too high or too low.