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 ...
Is THIS what they had in mind with the war on drugs?
Its almost as though they are saying "What have you got to hide?"
"Let us look in your bladder won't you?"
Christ Almighty.
We'll put cameras on your streets, too.
I guess you have to be that old to remember when unconstitutional searches weren't routine.
he was lucky he wasn't taken to the hospital and tasered into compliance, as one PD did somewhere
All is not lost - there is reaction against this by some parents who want him rehired.
See:
July 21, 2005, 10:06AM
Fired crossing guard gets show of support
Parents want HISD to rehire 79-year-old who was terminated for refusing drug test
By JASON SPENCER
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle
http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3275476
These days, Kenneth, that's not always a great thing. But we agree that he cares and that this should never have happpened.
B.S.
If they suspect he is drunk, can't they just have him blow on a breathalyzer? If he is not otherwise impaired doing his duties, then what's the point of the test?
Must have been a "pop" quiz.
Oh, puh-leeez! Back in the day, cops would routinely bust the asses and premises of people they considered to be "bad guys", and the streets and citizenry were much safer as a result. The old coot refused to follow his employer's policy, and he was shown the door. Cry me a freakin' river.
"If you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to fear".
This is exactly what the 5th amendment is supposed to prevent.
The employer in this case is a government institution, and thus is restricted by the same bonds that chain the government as a whole.
"It would completely destroy our ability to keep children safe if we allowed people to refuse the drug or alcohol test," he said.
Bureaucratic group think always trumps good sense.
I'd say common sense, but if common sense was truly common, they'd have some of it.
Where's the ACLU when you need them???
</sarcasm>
It's not entirely unreasonable to ask that people associated with school children should take random drug tests. It's important to protect children from drug dealers, as far as possible. But the whole point of random drug tests, surely, is to use a little common sense. The folks who chose him to test, and then pressed the issue, clearly had no common sense.
It's really the same with random bag checks in the NYC transportation system. It makes some sense, but not if they absolutely refuse to do elementary profiling (i.e., young males).
lol
sad but true
I've found it pointless to argue with a drug warrior. In their minds, there is a whole set of footnotes written in invisible ink on the Bill of Rights that say "unless you are trying to prevent someone from using drugs."
P. S. As the article says, people who work for the schools sign an agreement that they may be drug tested. It's annoying, but it's not a constitutional violation. It's just unfortunate that so many officials seem to be idiots in implementing these policies.
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.