KymcoForum.com
General => General Discussion => Topic started by: streido on September 06, 2012, 04:30:00 PM
-
Like the topic title says, whats your opinion on random drug & alcohol testing of employees by their employer?
I work for a large multi-national company who have just decided to introduce these tests for all employees. Starting next week an outside company will come in, randomly choose a percentage of employees from their clock numbers (with no idea of names etc we are told), then test these employees for drugs and/or alcohol. Those testing positive will be suspended and "offered the required support to overcome their addiction".
Personally i find the whole thing a gross invasion of my privacy and my right to have a private personal life outside of work. We already have a drug and alcohol policy which allows managers to ask someone they suspect of being under the influence of drugs or alcohol to take a test, ie if they look drugged/drunk or if they can smell drugs or drink off them, which i fully support. I find the idea of mass random testing to be totally unacceptable though. I used to smoke a joint or 5 but stopped over a month ago for my own reasons (probably fortunately), i rarely drink alcohol much these days and dont smoke cigs apart from the odd cigar. Why should i be punished if i choose to smoke a joint in the future, maybe while on holiday or at a party one weekend? Given cannabis can be detected weeks or even months after smoking isnt it unreasonable to punish someone having an odd joint while at the same time allowing others to get totally hammered on alcohol all weekend, every weekend, as long as they sober up by Monday morning?
I know this kind of thing is big in the US so just wondered how you all deal with it or feel about it? Like i say, i have no problem if the guy is stoned, drunk or high at work, but to me my personal time is my personal business. If it affects my work then deal with it, if not then leave me be. Feels like Minority Report, only for real :o
-
I feel you but I would not be at all surprised to find out your companys insurance provider is behind the new policy . Probably much lower rates for employers that test . Good luck .
-
We someimes get alcoholic drinks as a gift from our company and are asked to drink during work. In this case it wouldn't be applicable.
In most other jobs an employee just needs to do his job, medical issues are only between the employee and his trusted physician. Breaking the professional secrecy is an offence.
Only in very special jobs (with very high security demands) and only as contracted, the company may enforce a no alcohol/drug policy.
-
i had the same thing with 2 past jobs. it was inforced that on the spot checkes would be done. noone ever got tested... each monthley meeting we were told the same thing.there is going to be checks this month. and it never happened...
-
Yeah Juice i heard about that insurance thing, i imagine that may well be a factor. I also suspect it may well be a ruse to get rid of employees without paying out redundancy payments. Work has suspiciously gone a bit thin on the ground recently and i would not put it past them to use this to cut numbers while saving money?
My main problem is they are only paying me to work 37hrs per week yet they want to control my private life outwith work. Who the fu©k do they think they are? I am of the opinion that smoking an occasional joint in no way means you have a "problem", in exactly the same way that having an occasional few beers does not mean you have a drink problem. Thing is these assholes will not see it like that, drink is good, drugs are bad for them because they are ill informed on the facts.
Even tho i will be negative 10 months out of 12 if tested it pisses me off i cant now choose to smoke a spliff, in MY time, in MY home without fear of being labelled as someone with a drug problem? I have no problem with drink or drugs, i just would like to be able have a joint occasionally if i choose to, which in no way affects my performance at work or attendence. I asked the question "what if i go to Amsterdam for a weekend with my mates and smoke hash?", answer was "You will fail the test if you are tested and be suspended". That is B.S, i have done nothing illegal yet will still be punished!!! Again controlling my private, personal life........
I am seriously thinking of looking for another job.
-
I'm not in favor of it at all myself, that being said I work on a passenger railroad and depending on the relationship you have with the operations and movements of trains will have bearing on how often you get tested.
In my group "communications" we get tested once a year or if we are suspected of being under some influence. If you have direct or indirect contact with the operations of the Rail Road you are spot checked (called random) then once a year called (annuals) and if they suspect your under the influence.
-
I like the idea I like working in a safe place not next to someone that might not be all there because of drugs or what ever. my work does drug testing but only if you get hurt at work. you have to have a drug test done to come back.
-
In our case, drug tests are requisites for employment... so it's voluntary... if you want the job, then you must comply.
Random drug tests, however, is a different story... you can invoke your right against self-incrimination or you can volunteer. The Company can only require you a drug test, if they suspect you are high, look drunk, or look stoned, other than this, they cannot force an employee to take a drug test. It's in the Bill of Rights under our Constitution and it's illegal.... your right against self incrimination...
-
My job deals with high voltage, time-critical show cues, heavy equipment, ladders and did I mention high voltage?
I don't care what your opinion on pot is: It slows you down, and where I work it's against University policy. I terminate anyone on my crew caught drinking before or on the job, and the same goes to smoking out. It's in black and white on the contract when you sign for it. If you can't put the substance down when your job entails a certain level of safety, I don't want you on the job.
Usually, the only ones who bitch at length about it are the ones who are addicted to the stuff. Yes, pot is addictive. Tell a chronic pothead to stop smoking for 3 months. They won't. Like any addiction, it needs to be treated and broken. And, it alters the mind, which on the job is a liability.
-
If my contract didn't explicitly allow for this I would be sure to point that out...
-
Some good points. Like i said my personal concern is a matter of privacy and the right to have a personal and private life away from work. I would NEVER dream of smoking anything while at work, not even a cig, in the same way i would never drink alcohol at work EVER.
Pot/Grass/hash is NOT addictive, this has been medically proven many times. The act, ritual and "scene" around it can be addictive tho as well as the nicotine in the tobacco if you mix it like that. Recent reports state it in no way permanently alters the brain or intelligence of regular smokers as long as they do not start before the age of 18. Under 18's who smoke do lose some brain function which IS permanent. Given the effects or "high" from a joint last maybe 2-4 hours at most i would say it is comparable to alcohol. The differemce is alcohol cannot be detected after 12-14 hours where THC from cannabis stays in the fat cells of the body fkr anywhere from 2 days to 30 days plus. This does not mean you are high for 30 days or in ANY way affected once the high wears off, its just in your fat cells so will be detected in your urine as it leaves the body after being broken down, the brain is NOT under the influence during this time.
I am 100% behind testing ANYONE who appears stoned, drugged or drunk at work, a blanket testing of ALL employees is just wrong tho as far as i am concerned. It is also a violation of our privacy and rights to a private life outwith work. Imo.
If any employee has a problem with drink or drugs it is apparent thro them taking time off, being late more often, making mistakes at work or acting oddly, these folk can be tested if suspected of having a problem, why test us all?
I know guys in their 50's & 60's who smoke a spliff most nights after dinner and just chill at home, they NEVER miss a day at work, ALWAYS produce great work and have no problem with concentration or any other issues. These guys will fail a test tho they are NOT under the influence while at work EVER.
At the same time i know many people who go straight to the pub after work, drink for 2-4 hours then go home pretty smashed 3-5 nights per week, they often miss days due to hangovers or sleep in due to alcohol the night before. These guys will pass any test as they are NOT under the influence at work either but have a far bigger problem imo.
A single spliff every few months harms no-one but it could lose a good worker his/her job. Different if they are permanently stoned and a complete "space cadet" type i agree. Where i live alcohol is a far, far bigger problem and this is often stated by the police as well as doctors and surgeons.
-
It's simple, really,... check your laws... and if it's illegal and violates one's right..., then that's it! No more this and that... I've been in Human Resources for 20 years and perfectly aware of our Labor Laws and other related laws... I formulated a Drug Policy years back but guided with the law. I made sure my company policy is perfectly fair and legal...
-
It's simple, really,... check your laws... and if it's illegal and violates one's right..., then that's it! No more this and that... I've been in Human Resources for 20 years and perfectly aware of our Labor Laws and other related laws... I formulated a Drug Policy years back but guided with the law. I made sure my company policy is perfectly fair and legal...
Our Trade Union reps have already looked into it Vivo and because it is a fairly new thing in the UK for these tests with general employers it is a "grey area". The Army etc have had these testing procedures for decades but "normal" workers have not. It is listed as a violation of the rights of workers to a private life under the European Human Rights act but the grey area is because companies are now trying to use Health and Safety laws to impose the tests and they have yet to be challenged fully. A few cases have gone to court for folk who refused the test and these were rejected but as yet no-one here has challenged whether simply having the residue of a drug in your system days or weeks after taking the drug constitutes you being "under the influence" while at work which could lead to dismissal for Gross Misconduct. I am a Trade Union Health & Safety rep where i work and i can tell you our incidents and accidents have been dropping for the last decade or more thro improvements in awareness, better training and education, and safer working practices. I cannot remember ANY accident or injury occurring in the last 15 years due to alcohol or drug use or abuse at work.
At the minute our T.U are trying to clarify the exact specifics of the law and legallities of these tests so they are better able to defend or represent any member failing a test. Like i said i, and our Trade Union, are 100% behind tackling anyone who appears drunk or drugged while at work, at the same time tho we disagree with blanket random testing for all.
-
Just to add, it is not illegal here to have residue of drugs in your system if stopped by the police and tested. It IS illegal to be under the infulence of and possess illegal drugs but simply having residue in your system is NOT illegal if you are not "high" at the time, ie if stopped for a driving offence etc.
So the police and courts will not punish you yet your employer will :-\
-
I've never been subjected to a random drug test and I wonder if they take into account any prescription drugs that may be in your system. Also, don't know if it's an urban legend, but poppy seeds, say from a poppy seed bagel, could affect your test as it may appear as a component of opium.
I think if your job is one that requires you to work with heavy equipment, or to carry a license such as a bus or taxi driver, construction worker, etc .... then I think the random test is apt. Outside of that I don't think it's necessary.
However, I wonder if there is another facet to this law. All illegal drugs are connected to organized crime which too often have blood on their hands. Numerous people for decades have been beaten, intimidated, forced into labor and killed because of illegal drugs. If you purchase any illegal drug, even if it's for recreational use you are supporting these organizations, and unfortunately any crimes associated with them. If you grow the drugs yourself, such as pot, or purchase/use them in a legal environment such as in Amsterdam than you are at least morally free of these actions, but any illegal purchase does have consequences.
I'm not a big fan of drugs -- pot or otherwise only because several members of my own family have had serious problems with them. I've seen first hand what they can do to a person, their loved ones, and their own careers.
-Wolf
-
I think if your job is one that requires you to work with heavy equipment, or to carry a license such as a bus or taxi driver, construction worker, etc .... then I think the random test is apt. Outside of that I don't think it's necessary.
pot or otherwise only because several members of my own family have had serious problems with them. I've seen first hand what they can do to a person, their loved ones, and their own careers.
Totally agree with what you say Wolf 100%. I also have/had 2 friends who became addicted to smack, one died thro drugs but one got help and quit, but only after being sent to prison. Even soft drugs for some cause problems, for many tho the odd joint or line of coke is socially acceptable, i dont do this now but i admit i have in the past experimented with drink and drugs in my late teens - early 20's. I think most kids do these days tbh, at least around here.
If its causing you problems in life then i believe this would show up in your appearance, manner and attitude and generally how you conduct yourself, at work and at home. For many tho they experiment then move on with life, get married, have kids and it is not an issue or problem in their lives. Seems wrong to punish some 19 yr old apprentice just cos he went out on Fri/Sat and took an Ecstacy or smoked a doob and has reminants of it in his system come Monday or Tuesday? Least it does to me. If he is a stoner or has real trouble with drink/drugs this will show in his work so then he can be dealt with in whatever way is best.
Im basically against it purely on principle alone. I do not like the feeling the company "own" me even when im not at work. If my work suffers because of drink or drugs i would fully expect to be sanctioned for it, if not then leave me alone. Whats next? Company approved haircuts? No employees may have bad thoughts about the company or speak out against wrong-doing? Implants to track your movements outwith work? The company must approve your friend?
Its a slippery slope.
-
It is a very big difference if your company never makes a secret about compulsory abstinence from the early beginning of application for the job (written in specification and contract), or if it is a sudden excuse after many years of employment to get rid of old employees or just outsourcing etc.
An uniteral and subsequently change in the terms of contract can be discussed at the labour court. The side wanting to change something has to prove the inevitableness.
-
I would not want a drug user to work for me. They are the most undependable group. They are also more apt. to have an accident than non-users. Many, not all are dishonest and will take whatever they can get in order to get drugs. Pre-screening is good for the hiring company. I am not certain that it is fair to require employees to be screened unless there is good reason such as attendance problems or other reliability questions. Employees found to be users should be offered counseling and be offered options assistance if they agree. Usually, the counseling is not permanently effective but it should be attempted.
And yet, in my experience I have seen users and alcoholics who were good employees.
-
I think it is a great idea. It may help prevent a workplace injury or death. If you do not drink on the job or do drugs, there is nothing to worry about.
-
I think it is a great idea. It may help prevent a workplace injury or death. If you do not drink on the job or do drugs, there is nothing to worry about.
i do agree with streido... no one should be drink or drugs at work. but in your own time its your choice. years ago i went camping up stanton moor with friends for weakend. we drank/ smoked weed/took mushrooms. but we did this twice a year or so.just a bit of fun. dont take anything now. but i belive that its my choice to do that, in my own time. i know druge stay in your sistem for a while but would not take anything the day befor work.
i have nothing to fear of drug tests now but do find it an invation of privicy....but if suspitions of being at work drunk or stoned, i think then a test should be done.
-
I think it is a great idea. It may help prevent a workplace injury or death. If you do not drink on the job or do drugs, there is nothing to worry about.
Yup i agree Blitz, no one should ever be at work drunk or drugged. Like skippy said tho some drugs can be detected weeks or months after use even tho you are not under any influence at that time. So in effect you are punishing someone for something they may well have done weeks ago and outside of work :-\
If you looked in the local bars around my work at lunchtime you will find them pretty full with our workers having a pint and a snack for lunch then going back to work in the afternoon. Most are not drunk but they have had a beer, to me this is worse than someone who partied after work on a Fri night and tested positive come monday for some drug or other they may have taken Fri night?
Btw, we have had ZERO accidents or injuries related to drink or drugs in the 14 yrs ive been a safety rep there. This is the 3rd time ive workedfkr this company and i can say that things are WAY better now than 15-20 years ago. We used to find beer and spirit empties in the toilets and you could smell hash/grass most days also. We dont have ANY of this now, doesnt happen any more, hasnt been like that for at least 10yrs now and this is before any testing has come in, so i cant see the need for blanket testing at all. Test suspect folk by all means but do not accuse and treat straight non-drinkers as possible users/addict, to me thats just plain wrong and all trust goes out the window. It all then goes back to "them and us" mentallity.
-
It's simple, really,... check your laws... and if it's illegal and violates one's right..., then that's it! No more this and that... I've been in Human Resources for 20 years and perfectly aware of our Labor Laws and other related laws... I formulated a Drug Policy years back but guided with the law. I made sure my company policy is perfectly fair and legal...
In the US we have constitutional rights that protect us against unreasonable searcg and seizure, however the way around it is what is unreasonable? When dealing with thousnads of lives on a daily basis it is reasonable to ask you to show you are clean (at least that is what 51% or more of public opinion is).
-
In the US we have constitutional rights that protect us against unreasonable searcg and seizure, however the way around it is what is unreasonable? When dealing with thousnads of lives on a daily basis it is reasonable to ask you to show you are clean (at least that is what 51% or more of public opinion is).
Maybe in the USA 080, over here this is a new thing for us. I know is a lot more common in the states but here we dont have this type of thing unless you drive a passenger vehicle of somekind or perhaps work in highly dangerous situations or enviroments, ie oil refineries, working with explosives, working on railways, ambulance drivers/firemen etc, the average joe in an average job has never been expected to put up with this type of thing here. Guess people are following the states and opening drug testing business's to cash in ona new market here :-\
-
Guess people are following the states and opening drug testing business's to cash in ona new market here :-\
Exactly right. If they gave a damn about impairment, that can be readily tested for. But no. Let's test for metabolites, which do not prove impairment, but political correctness, instead.
.
-
Exactly right. If they gave a damn about impairment, that can be readily tested for. But no. Let's test for metabolites, which do not prove impairment, but political correctness, instead.
.
Yup, kinda like the war on terror etc, create a bogeyman, frighten people then rake in the money when you can also provide the "solution" :-\
-
Been subjected to what amounted to "threats" of random testing but never done. That is the MBA's way of dealing with the problem because they don't wanna shell out for the tests. I have done hiring tests all negative and did not have a problem with that. I HAVE worked with stoners and drunks and did not like it. They are too dangerous and unpredictable or dangerous BECAUSE they are unpredictable. Gripes to the management about such co-workers usually fell on deaf ears. It is insurance companies that are responsible for some of these "requirements". It is good to be retired so I so not have to put up with this phase of life!
Karl
-
It may come down to what's the law. If being in possession of a CDS -- Controlled Dangerous Substance, or an illegal drug is illegal, then does an employer want to have someone working for them who possess such an item, or has taken one? Is taking a drug for recreation use a privacy issue/perceived entitlement, or is it a right, one protected by a country's constitution or body of laws?
Like I mentioned before, taking a joint every so often may seem like no big deal, but if it was purchased illegally than it may support organized crime -- the true target of a law enforcement crack down. If they can't get the suppliers then the focus is switched to the demand by changing the culture of small drug use.
I guess it comes down to whether or not you can live without the occasional joint, or if it's worth the risk.
-Wolf
-
I guess it comes down to whether or not you can live without the occasional joint, or if it's worth the risk.
Yup, i CAN easily do that, no probs, i just dont like being treated as some kind of junkie who needs tested. Like i said, for me its a matter of principle really.
Agree that buying drugs encourages and profits criminality too, or it can. Most grass here is now homegrown since its much easier and cheaper to set up a small grow area in an attic etc than buy it. Lots of chinese gangs have moved in here this last decade or so and normally rent a house in a normal street to grow in. To all neighbours they seem quiet and no trouble but inside they have bypassed electric meters and filled the home with plants, thrown an immigrant in there to watch it then reap the profits. Most folk now avoid this type of grass and either grow their own or buy from a friend who grows, least thats what i used to do.
It is perfectly legal here to own all growing equipment, seeds and any and all paraphernalia, just not the drugs. Tho saying that a small personal amount of ANY drug will not get you charged by police, nor will a couple of plants. Police are more concerned with dealers.
Still to get back to the point, where do we draw the line? Do you sack a worker for being charged for fighting in the street?, charged with DUI?, charged with using abusive language? None of these matter right now here but could well do in the future if it carries on like this.
I just hope this type of thing does not become widespread in the UK. If you do something in your private life which does not harm or endanger anyone else then i say it is no business of your employer. Will jus have to see how things pan out over the coming weeks andmnths, testing begins on Monday. I really hope i get chosen in the 1st batch, i have lots i want to discuss with the testers and thoseover-seeing them.
-
Btw after grass, the most abused drugs in the US are prescription drugs, normally obtained legally with a prescription from a doctor or clinic. Unless you count alcohol of course........
I would guess prescription drugs may actually be more abused than grass.
US prescription drugs second most abused drug (http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xpx9jz)
-
Many prescription drugs -- addictive painkillers, are sold illegal on street corners. It's one of the main things drug dealers and gangs push as oppose to people getting them from doctors. That was the case when I served on a grand jury in Camden, NJ for about 4 months. 90% of the cases were drug related.
I can understand how you're feeling. No one wants to be treated like a criminal. Hope they reconsider the policy.
-Wolf
-
I worked for an Arcade company. I was responsible for 12 locations that had approx 100 machines each. These machines generated approx 10grand a day in quarters (each location). So we all had to take drug tests each month, as well as polygraph tests.
One thing I learned from the start. If you smoke a joint BEFORE a polygraph you are the worlds most honest person. THC equalizes your metabolism, and makes even a LIAR appear truthful. Bottom line is every month I would pee positive for weed, and the polygraph would exonerate me. EVERY MONTH! I worked there for 6 years right out of collage.
What did I learn? Get high! It makes you a truthful person. (on paper)
Even tho I am a fun loving guy (hippie things) I won't have a "high" guy work for me. If the customer wants to hang out, and get hi fine... Not me or the guys that work for me. EVER! There is ONE excuse for poor workmanship. Inexperience.
-
This one may hit home:
http://news.yahoo.com/marijuana-smoking-tied-testicular-cancer-study-023342821.html (http://news.yahoo.com/marijuana-smoking-tied-testicular-cancer-study-023342821.html)
-Wolf
-
This one may hit home:
http://news.yahoo.com/marijuana-smoking-tied-testicular-cancer-study-023342821.html (http://news.yahoo.com/marijuana-smoking-tied-testicular-cancer-study-023342821.html)
-Wolf
I take that with a pinch of salt Wolf, like i do with most incomplete/inconclusive studies/theories. Seems like every week they change their mind on these type of thing. One week its drink more red wine, eat more dark chocolate and the next red wine is bad and choclate causes something or other. Not saying its not true, it may well be, i just chose to wait till something is proven 99% before i believe it. If we believed everything put out by these studies we would need to sit in a bubble somewhere and eat, drink and consume nothing. Even then some smart arse would prove the bubble was cancerous or gave you something or other :)
I just do what i want in life, within reason, my body soon tells me if it doesnt like it. ;)
-
Yes, and eat natural and fresh fruit and veges? What's fresh and natural nowadays, huh? Ever wonder why you cannot find a single insect or worm in your cabbage? because these insects are scared sh** to go near them for fear of those insecticides and other stuff.... :(
-
This one may hit home:
http://news.yahoo.com/marijuana-smoking-tied-testicular-cancer-study-023342821.html (http://news.yahoo.com/marijuana-smoking-tied-testicular-cancer-study-023342821.html)
-Wolf
No thanks.
-
Pimpy that put a shiver down my spine, yuk!!!!
Thats one bong i wouldnt take a hit from....no way. :D
-
Random drug screening is a joke and is discriminatory.
It should be all or none. With random screening, companies can pick their targets.
Test dates should not be known to anyone.
Have seen this in action. Companies will take care of their pets and bust the rest.
-
For UK companies who have had random drug and alcohol screening for many years you need look no further than the rail industry.
Everyone who works for a rail company in the UK is subject to random screening for alcohol and drugs and a positive test means immediate dismissal, no ifs, buts or maybes.
All perfectly legal and in accordance with UK employment law.
The rail unions are fully supportive of this policy because it exists to protect their members' welfare.
As for how often drug screening happens, I worked on the railway for 18 years and was tested four times.
-
Yeah GN i know about the railways, i work with several ex-rail workers. If the job entails public transport, pilots, people who work with firearms or another dangerous job then there is for sure a need to be alert and totally sober and straight at ALL times so testing will be in your contract and it is understandable. For a normal joe in a normal job its simply overkill tho. If someone has a drink or drug problem it quickly become apparent and they can be dealt with as an individual. We had not agreed to this when we all signed our contracts. They chose to introduce it. The whole thing just stinks. If they want to control my private life then i want paid 24hrs per day for my time i have to abide by their company rules, seems only fair to me. :-\