This whole thing about drug testing at work is insanity isn't it?

to humbly disagree, there isn't a direct, repeatable connection between casual or regular use of most substances and "one seemingly insignificant wrong move".

if that was the case, drinking alcohol wouldn't be allowed in "safety sensitive" jobs. better safe than sorry is how much of this bad legislation gets passed.

might be worth perusing this article before you try that.
http://www.erowid.org/psychoactives/testing/testing_faq.shtml

 

well that is fair if that is your experience but i can tell you that i had a job that drug tested, and there were no smokers on the crew. there were plenty of what you call "boozers" who were the head of the safety committee and the safest most vocal people when anyone was doing something that could possibly get them-self or someone else hurt.

 

not to be an ass but, how exactly do you know there were no smokers on that job?
fwiw, i was amazed to find out what kind of shit happened at the big international corporation i was at. mandatory random screening didn't keep insistent stoners from smoking there, i doubt it does in most circumstances.

 

If you have a problem with job related drug testing become self employed!

Personally I prefer to test my drugs at home.

There was a study done at a university in Washington state in the late '70s comparing the driving habits of habitual drinkers to those of heavy pot smokers and unlike the drinkers the more stoned the smokers were the more cautiously they drove.

I once had a job volunteering at a soup kitchen where the first part of the morning I chopped large amounts of things in a noisy crowded space and soon realized I while it was easier to mince a 50 lb bag of onions while in a stoned trance the results of being distracted out of that trance rhythm could be painful. On the other hand the second half of the day I was security dealing with (talking down and sometimes gently disarming) all manner of upset, hungry, freaked out folk. l quickly learned this was safer and easier while stoned. :2thumbsup:

 

lets say that the supposed drug users are liars and cheaters (on the drug tests) a stretch i know but lets just say so. that dosnt change the fact that half of the safety committee are vocally proud heavy alcohol users. and the second person from the top and most safety oriented person is the biggest alcoholic of the bunch. my point stands that judging weed VS alcohol isnt the answer. its just the best defense that the weed advocates have.

 

Being the most 'safety oriented' person is not the same as having the best over all lifetime safety record.

 

well that really sucks...

 

Brain damaged fools who's judgement cannot be trusted. :biker:

http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa63/aa63.htm

 

I've never agreed with it but it's not something that you can change. I have to laugh when they require a drug test for an executive who's accepted a position making $300k a year. Like really if he was a total drug addict loser would he be doing what he's doing making what he's making? NO!

I don't care what the hell people do in their private lives. It's not my business nor is it my employers business. I did work at one prestigious consulting firm years ago and they didn't require nor ask for a drug test. I think for them it was a cost thing plus there's no way you'd be working for them if you weren't all there in your head.

 

I would trust his judgement before i trusted yours gong

 

The company has 17 years without a time loss accident. So you are correct that it isnt the same thing but i wouldnt have brought it up if they were all talk.

 

Birds of a feather...

 

We need it where I work. It got so bad that some people were smoking it during their lunch breaks. The ones doing it on weekends had the good sense to at least leave it alone during the work week. I do not pity the person who works at a place knowing it is company policy from day one, yet risks getting fired doing some illegal drug anyway.
By the way, I work on a Federal installation, and it is clearly advertised there is a zero tolerance policy when a person is hired. If we had regular testing it would weed out those that are irresponsible with their use of recreational drugs.
It has a lot to do with priorities and growing up.

cheers,

JKHolman

 

Heaven forbid!

 

apparently there isn't zero tolerance. wager to guess that's not the only misrepresentation they make. kind of like when my old company used to say "safety first".

kind of like net fishing. who cares if a bunch of other life gets caught up in the net and dies. we got our fish.

 

nobody is stopping you from doing illegal things people.

 

inorite? i read this and went, who doesn't? drug tests are never cool, they're violating. here, i'm a stranger, pee in a cup for me.

 

I'm not a stranger.
I'm actually certified to give a UA, the coast guard requires 2 people on board to be. So if anyone gets seriously hurt everyone involved has to get tested.

 

now that scares me up there with law enforcement and used care salesmen. making a living violating people's bodies and using it to take away their livelihood? what about sovereignty? i worked in nursing and i could never be one of those piss testers because i'm against it, it's just wrong, here, i'm gonna judge you based on the chemistry in your waste. not weird at all.

 

Lol, makes me wonder what does it take to be certified to give UA...
someone grades you on how well you can watch a person pee in a cup?