Drug tests present major hurdle for employers

PBS Newshour ^ | May 29, 2016

[2ndDivisionVet]

As the unemployment rate drops across the country, employers are running into another problem – finding potential job candidates who will take and pass drug tests. Even though the country is amid an opioid epidemic, employers say marijuana has been the biggest hurdle. New York Times reporter Jackie Calmes talks to Hari Sreenivasan about her reporting on the issue.

HARI SREENIVASAN, PBS ANCHOR: So Jackie Calmes, how big is this problem of people walking away from a job interview when they hear that there’s a drug test?

JACKIE CALMES: Well, it’s bigger than I thought! Clearly, because this whole subject came to me in a completely separate news story I was reporting. And employers, local leaders, just volunteered to me that as the unemployment rate came down, the biggest hurdle they were facing in finding – in filling jobs was finding people who were willing to take a drug test, and if they did take a drug test, could pass it. And I thought, well, that can’t be as big a problem as they’re making it out to be.

So a couple of weeks later when I had some time, I started making calls around the country. This initial tip was in Indiana. And it was like shooting fish in a barrel; it was so easy to find employers to tell me it was a problem.

HARI SREENIVASAN: Is there any kind of way to break this down? Is it a type of worker? Is it from a specific region, a type of industry where these employers are facing these challenges?

JACKIE CALMES: It’s across the board, but it’s clearly a bigger problem in jobs for unskilled or low-skilled people....

[MNMom]

When people break laws willfully and I know about it I don’t hire them. People who willfully break laws and are belligerent about it pose too many risks. There are too many really good prospects out there for me to risk hiring someone who is just going to cause problems.

[discostu]

I think the primary problem is the belligerence. People break laws, it happens. Often deliberately. That’s the price of an over legislated country. You can choose not to hire them if you want, but frankly it just proves my point, especially since we all know for a fact that everybody in this country breaks laws. You’re just focusing on some laws, and you’re paranoid and nosy. Good luck with that.

[5th MEB]

In the V ring from 500 meters.
If an idiot willfully, consistently, breaks the laws of polite society, he/she will do the same thing to your safety regulations and company policies.

[MNMom]

Fortunately I live and do business in Minnesota so it’s not a problem.

[MNMom]

Yes, I can not afford to hire people who always think the rules should not apply to them. They are the first to sue you if they get themselves hurt and they are the first to do something that gets you sued by a customer.

There are too many really good people you can hire, its that simple.

[JBW1949]

I usually look at the U-6 number...It’s about 11-12% right now, I believe...

[Mrs. Don-o]

What is U-6 please? (There’s so much I need to learn.)

[JBW1949]

There are different government calculations of unemployment...
Try a search for “unemployment U-6” It should explain it...I’m not sure what all the criteria are, but it is more than what Obama wants released...

[JBW1949]

Maybe this will help:

In contrast to the U-3 rate, the U-6 unemployment rate includes all of these cases. Consequently, the U-6 rate is much truer to a natural, non-technical understanding of what it means to be unemployed. By capturing discouraged workers, underemployed workers and other folks who exist on the margins of the labor market, the U-6 rate provides a broad picture of the underutilization of labor in the country. In this sense, the U-6 rate is the true unemployment rate.

Read more: The True Unemployment Rate: U6 Vs. U3

[5th MEB]

Retired now (Thank GOD), been there done that.
Workers Compensation lawsuits as a result of their own incompetence or negligence, stealing both materials and time from the company, poor to physically dangerous craftsmanship (or lack thereof), deliberate sabotage of jobs they don't want to do.
Tried to fire an incompetent, lazy, lying, thieving, member of the WorkersComp Mafia once.
Unfortunately, I hired the weasel to begin with; based on the reports from Human Resources and outside interviewers.
First time I had the documentation to can him, the company backed down telling me “he would turn over a new leaf” and I should give him another chance.
Second time, I had him cold on theft of company property and sabotaging a pretty expensive job because he didn't want to do it.
The company chickened out saying he had a lawyer and would sue us, I told the company “he's going to do that anyway, just a matter of time”.
Third time was the charm. I had complete documentation, wittnesses to the incident, and a detective's film footage of the incident.
He called in sick on a monday morning, I said fine; I immediately called the company's insurance carrier and told them to get one of their detectives out to what I found out was a side job he was working.
He fell off the second story he was framing onto an existing house, the detective got it on film.
He came back into work on wednesday (limping, guess he thought I wouldn't see him), he called into the office about 10:30 am claiming he had a bad fall on the job.
I made sure I went down to the hospital right then to fill out the Accident Report Form, the Industrial Accident/Injury Report Forms, and the Workers Compensation Claims Forms.
Of course there were no witnesses to his “on the job accident”, it was just his word on what happened.
Dumb ass forgot that I controlled all of his work orders, toughest job he had that day was to hang a single 34”X72” door.
Talked to the insurance investigator as soon as I got back to the office; he told me to just wait until the rat filed the Claims Forms for for damages.
The scumbag did and we went to court, he was suing for a 130,000 K and all medical expenses.
I am not sure if that bastard is still in prison for attempt to defraud the State of California, but I sure hope so.
It took 6 years of close documentation on the quality and quantity of work he did (or failed to do).
27 lost time (so called) accidents paid for by the taxpayers.
Probably a couple of thousand man hours (off the clock, not paid) on my part to investigate and document his failure to perform his contractual duties.
Have no idea how much our insurance carrier spent to assist me in getting rid of the employee from hell, probably a lot.
So to any body who does not think proper vetting, drug and alcohol testing are not important, I have only this to say.
YOU ARE NIEVE AND STUPID, YOU WILL INHERIT THE EMPLOYEE FROM HELL.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Thank you.

[NurdlyPeon]

I always thought it funny that one of the masks for marijuana in pee was called “urine luck”.

I believe that was Tommy Chong's product (of Cheech and Chong).

[JBW1949]

You’re quite welcome...

[Vision Thing]

You shouldn’t need to pass a drug test for any job that doesn’t involve the potential for life risking injuries.

when you get audited by the IRS, I sure hope to God that your accountant is stoned out of his mind that day when he goes in to represent you. #potuberalles

[MNMom]

Thank you for your hard work, so many people just pay and let it go. The work it takes to document everything and follow through hardly seems worth it, but if there were more people like you fewer people would get away with this crap and fewer would try it.

It pays to be very careful to avoid the employee from hell, but it also pays to wait for that one employee who will see a difficult task through to completion. Your a Gem and I wish there were more like you.

[Wolfie]

I imagine any hair would do. But it shows that employers will back down if the people stand up. Shame it’s Canadians and Europeans standing up, and Americans saying “Yes, Boss, where do I pee?”, Land Of The Free, and all.

[CrimsonTidegirl]

“Xanax is the latest “legal” drug craze. I’ve know waaay too many people taking it.”

I’m on Xanax for severe panic attacks and it’s a godsend. It can be abused like any other substance but that doesn’t mean that it is a bad drug.

The only downside that it is highly addictive and can cause hellish withdrawal symptoms if not taken for a few days (as I have unfortunately discovered).

I don’t really understand why people abuse Xanax. It doesn’t make me “happy” like opioids. It is just a lifesaver when a panic attack is coming on. My panic attacks can be really debilitating.