Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Crossing Guard, 79, Fired Over Drug Test
KPRC ^ | 7/22/05 | Mikey_1962

Posted on 07/22/2005 1:43:50 PM PDT by Mikey_1962

HOUSTON -- A 79-year-old school crossing guard was fired over a drug test, but not because he failed it, Local 2 reported Thursday. Francis Light refused to take it, violating Houston Independent School District policy.

Light has been a familiar face at Oak Forest Elementary School in northwest Houston for 16 years as the school's crossing guard. He was fired last month after refusing to take a random drug-alcohol test. Light said his system is clean, and after so many loyal years on the job, he was insulted.

"I got to think as long as people know me, long as I've been doing this, then they want me to take a drug test kind of made me mad," he said.

An HISD spokesman said all employees are subject to random tests.

Light signed the form, but did not read the fine print.

"He's the only one with loving touch. He knows you by name," said Kenneth Bonte, a student.

Parents said they would miss Light's presence at the school intersection.

"It sounds like there was a misunderstanding. He should've been handled possibly more gently," said Vonda Bonte, a mother.

"He's as much a part of the school as teachers are," said Ann Zallar, a mother.

Light said he should have just submitted to the drug-alcohol test, but said there are no hard feelings. He said that he will be turning 80 years old soon and he was considering retiring anyway. Light just did not want it to end like this.

HISD considers all refusals to take the drug-alcohol test as a positive test.

It requires employees to submit to the tests immediately. The district has a policy to terminate all employees who refuse to take the test

(Excerpt) Read more at click2houston.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption
KEYWORDS: drugwar; eightyyearoldstoner; passthebong; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 next last
To: Know your rights

You see these two cases as the same too?

Amazing.


101 posted on 07/22/2005 3:20:00 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for Sgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962

People who are almost 80 years old mostly have a WEALTH of stuff in their bladder to hide from their employers. Heck, when I was just over 30, I paid for my psychological counseling out of my own pocket rather than use insurance and run the risk that my bosses would find out about it and think I was therefore somehow incompetent or unreliable (I wasn't-- it was all related to family issues.)

Hiding stuff from your employer is a DARN GOOD IDEA, unless one is hiding something that would impair functioning related to the job. So much of what is in our bodies or our minds is just NONE OF THEIR DAMNED BUSINESS.


102 posted on 07/22/2005 3:23:11 PM PDT by walden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Luddite Patent Counsel
You must be real proud. Blackbird. I'm always "real proud" when Justice Scalia agrees with me, as when he wrote the opinion in Veronia School District case in '95. Blackbird You must be "real proud" of your screen name. You know, it appears automatically at the end of your post, so you don't have to type "Blackbird" in every time. You did know that, right? Or are we just randomly typing "Blackbird" after every paragraph? Blackbird. Actually, it's kind of fun. Blackbird. Addictive in a way, almost. Blackbird. Alright, I'm stopping now. Blackbird. Really. Blackbird. Blackbird.

I have to admit there may be some cases when drug testing needs to be done. This post is getting real close to probable cause.
103 posted on 07/22/2005 3:30:13 PM PDT by microgood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: walden

Your reasoning for paying for your own psychological counseling indicates your mind is very sound. So what made you think you were crazy? LOL


104 posted on 07/22/2005 3:32:44 PM PDT by HawaiianGecko (Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting different results is the definition of insanity.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962

If an employer has a drug testing policy it has to be applied equally across the board, otherwise anyone can cry discimination when their test comes back dirty. "Why did you test me when you didn't test that other guy? I'm being discriminated against!" It has nothing to do with who the employer thinks is using drugs unless it is obviously affecting their job performance. I don't understand why this guy wouldn't want to be tested if it meant being able to get rid of some other druggie putting the children at risk.


105 posted on 07/22/2005 3:33:44 PM PDT by pobodys nerfect
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962

He signed a consent form that agreed to this.

Shame on him.


106 posted on 07/22/2005 3:35:46 PM PDT by TASMANIANRED (Democrats haven't had a new idea since Karl Marx.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pobodys nerfect
"If an employer has a drug testing policy it has to be applied equally across the board..."

The last random drug test I had on active duty was as a very senior CWO4 with almost 30 years in.

I have to admit, it ticked me off. Why didn't they call BEFORE I'd gotten rid of about four-five cups of morning coffee!

Other then that I didn't feel demeaned or feel suspect.

107 posted on 07/22/2005 3:39:13 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962
I simply don't understand the hoo-hah. Just because he is a good crossing guard doesn't mean he's clean. We set up safe guards and them when some one violates them, lefties want to make an exception because he was under age, black, a fairy or a nice old man.

Urine tests are opportunities to prove, yet again, that an employee continues to be as fully qualified today to perform the duties of his position as the day he was originally hired.

If this was Darnell or Shaneequa, there'd be no discussion, they'd be gone. I haven't heard the reason why this guy refused the test.

Let me also point out that this is a cost of having unions. If they ggive Pop a pass or a second chance, then the next time they get a concensus evil-doer who refuses to take a test, the union will claim a precedent's been established.

No, I don't understand the bleeding heart support for this nice old man (who may be dirty, we don't know).

108 posted on 07/22/2005 3:43:32 PM PDT by Tacis ("Democrats - The Party of Traitors, Treachery and Treason!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962
Actually, it might have worked out for the best. He was intending to retire anyway. This way, the kids get a valuable lesson in the consequences of bureaucracy, and they learn that you can just say "No.".
109 posted on 07/22/2005 3:47:48 PM PDT by tacticalogic (Say goodnight, Grace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mysterio; thoughtomator

Excellent point, Mysterio...after all, the #1 concern for protecting American life & safety is to prevent drug users or those who refuse to take drug tests from being allowed to have a job, correct?

Never mind the terrorists...that's just a minor issue: the REAL threats are from folks like Frncis Light!


110 posted on 07/22/2005 3:48:44 PM PDT by libertyman (It's time to make marijuana legal AGAIN!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: thoughtomator

Yeah, but he consented.


111 posted on 07/22/2005 3:49:33 PM PDT by Dolphan (It's the 99% of Mohammedans that make the other 1% look bad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Little Pig
This is exactly what the 5th amendment is supposed to prevent.

When the Constitution was written there was no such thing as a school crossing guard.

For that matter, there were no public schools, either. I think we could resolve a lot of these issues by simply expecting our citizens to grow the hell up and stop relying on the government to educate them, help them cross the street, etc.

112 posted on 07/22/2005 3:53:04 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but Lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: zoyd

If my employer instituted a drug test as a condition for my employment, I'd bring the urine vial to the bathroom and bring it back with a healthy-sized chunk of "#2" in it.


113 posted on 07/22/2005 3:58:21 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (I ain't got a dime, but what I got is mine. I ain't rich, but Lord I'm free.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962
The pro-testing people here may not have considered what a false positive test can do to an individual. Once a test erroneously comes back positive, many employees are fired or ostracized by the employer. Most employees in this horrible situation must retest at their own expense to prove their innocense, and are often frequently retested. God forbid that another false positive should occur. The stigma of a false positive can stay with an employee his entire career, and be a block to future promotion.

So, to all you drug-testing lovers out there, I hope you test positive real soon, so you can experience the "system" that you so admire. Perhaps after your life and career are ruined by an incompetent lab tech, you wont be so eager to put yourself in jeopardy.

BTW, most private companies that drug test, justify it by saying their insurance requires it. This is but a step away for testing employees' cholesteral & sugar levels, nicotine testing (already being done), and other intrusions into your lifestyle.

Why would anyone submit to a test that cannot help you, but only hurt you, and is so potentially inaccurate? Did you know poppy seeds give a false positive for heroin? Many foods & medications give false positives on drug tests.

Is this the way you want to end your career? If your employeer wanted to randomly search the employees' houses for missing company property, would you allow your house to be searched?

This is just creeping socialism! How do you eat an elephant? One bite at the time!

114 posted on 07/22/2005 4:20:28 PM PDT by Mister Da (Nuke 'em til they glow!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: HawaiianGecko

Oh, I knew I wasn't crazy, I was just unhappy and dealing with my messed-up family of origin. But, thank you!


115 posted on 07/22/2005 4:22:50 PM PDT by walden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962

I don't like the WOD, at least for non-addictive drugs, but I had something happen that makes me realize that drug tests are necessary.

About a week before I started with my present employer, they had pee-drug-tests of everyone. A little over 10% had illegal drugs in their systems. I was asked to pull the personel files on all of them and compare the (1) number of lost-time work injuries, (2) the number of sick-leave hours, and (3) the number of times each was late, compared to the entire company.

The number of lost-time work injuries was 2 to 3 times more than the average. The number of sick-leave hours was about 5 times as much and the number of late times was 10 to 12 times as much. Every one of the people that were caught with illegal drugs had numerous counselings, reprimands, time-on-the-street, and other disciplinary measures. Because of the union, it was very difficult to fire them without a huge paper trail and many chances to reform. However, with a positive drug test, they were fired immediately.

Anyone who says that they should be able to do whatever they want on their own time is trying to fool themselves. It slops over into work and endangers everyone they work with. BTW, the people operated heavy machinery (press brake, shear, punch machine, forklifts, cranes, and over-the-road trucks).


116 posted on 07/22/2005 4:23:35 PM PDT by jim_trent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mikey_1962
What a rat hole, but that is what a good issue it is all about then, is it not.

The scary thing is that it is perfectly legal to use any drug you desire in this republic. You are not allowed to posses certain drugs, but there is no constitutional prohibition against using them; unless the result of personal use ends up with you being a publicly disorderly person.

You can sit in your house and smoke an ounce of opium, if the police intrude after it is gone, they can not charge you with a crime. Maybe they can try the disorderly person charge, but it will be tossed. All drug charges are based on possession.

These drug test laws are an attempt to sidestep this statutory reality. You can loose your job on Monday for something that you did on Saturday.

Other than known drug offenders under court order because of past convictions (and therefore probable cause to suggest future offense}, random testing is not Constitutionally valid. This is just an end run around a Constitutional provision, these are myriad today and we all eventually get used to them.

That is just my view, not the view of those who hold power.
117 posted on 07/22/2005 4:28:44 PM PDT by mmercier (a long acquaintance with sorrow)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BlackbirdSST
I want all POLITICIANS and CEO's and SCHOOL BOARD ADMINS Drug Tested DAILY! That might bring some reason back to this debate.

We need to demand this. All school administrators, mayors, city council members, Congress, EVERYONE!

118 posted on 07/22/2005 4:46:14 PM PDT by Black Tooth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: jim_trent

-- Anyone who says that they should be able to do whatever they want on their own time is trying to fool themselves. --

Sieg Heil, Mein furhrer!

Hey, why not set up company housing & a company store - which all the lucky employees must use. Start you own private police force to "police" your employees - have 24 hour surprise inspections.

As long as humans are ALLOWED to remain human, their frailties will ALWAYS spill over onto the job. That's why they have supervisors!

Man, you need to read the book "1984", and/or hire yourself some robots.


119 posted on 07/22/2005 4:49:15 PM PDT by Mister Da (Nuke 'em til they glow!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 116 | View Replies]

To: Black Tooth

Drug AND alcohol testing!

You are absolutely right!


120 posted on 07/22/2005 4:54:59 PM PDT by Mister Da (Nuke 'em til they glow!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120121-138 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson