[Mikey_1962]

The Law of Unintended Consequences in action.

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.

[walden]

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.

[pobodys nerfect]

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.

[TASMANIANRED]

He signed a consent form that agreed to this.

Shame on him.

[Tacis]

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).

[tacticalogic]

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.".

[Mister Da]

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!

[jim_trent]

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).

[mmercier]

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.

[Wolfie]

The sooner the World War II generation dies off the better. Then we can really start busting heads without anyone around who remembers what freedom was like.

[Xenalyte]

On the one hand, random testing sucks.

On the other hand, "didn't read the fine print" is no excuse when you sign something. Which he didn't, and did.