A key point here is that we have expensive, dangerous machinery which could kill someone instantly if they aren't paying attention.
Yet, we've had no injury more serious than a severely sliced finger in roughly two decades of 24/7 production at our facility. Who can make a coherent argument that drug tests are unnecessary with that type of track record?
I guess a similar situation without testing would be coherent.
Question:
Do you only do initial screening, or random screenings after hire as well? And, do you warn of upcoming screenings?
If the answer is only an initial test, then you’ve got those who - for instance - smoke pot working for you. I can guarantee it... You’d be mighty surprised if you randomly tested.
Also, my husband has worked in a variety of shops - even before drug testing was pretty common, and had no serious injuries for years as well, so that’s not a very good deciding factor, IMO.
Also, may I ask what types of machines you are running? How heavy/big are the parts you make? There are a lot of factors that go into how dangerous the machine you are working on is.
[Wish my DH was home at the moment because he’d have more questions, and probably more precise examples of companies he has worked for with similar accident records. I honestly find it hard to believe that you have only had people with sliced fingers - my husband had a corneal abrasion once WHILE wearing safety goggles. There was a burr in his hair, and it fell into his eyes. “Slices” on fingers happen everyday in the work he does. A cut on your finger isn’t even accident-report worthy, honestly. Now, if you’re talking about slicing a finger OFF, or de-gloving a hand, then that’s a little different - but again - that’s more to do with safety procedures and pure lack of common sense and incompetence than anything else in all the cases I’ve heard of. Half of those things - getting scalped, degloving a finger/hand, etc... are the horror stories they tell you about in school, and don’t happen nearly as often as it may seem.]
Almost ALL machinery could kill you instantly if you aren’t paying attention. Idiots who don’t follow safety rules are more likely to have problems. I’m guessing you are extremely strict in regard to safety procedures.
Husband just came in, so perhaps he has other insight to offer. I’ll ask him about safety records in the shops he’s worked in over the years - testing employers vs. non-testing employers.
I don’t see any benefit to getting rid of drug tests. We do hair and urinalysis, 10-panel. Initial as pre-screening, and randomly upon hire. Meth and pain pill abuse are rampant in this area.
1) We operate some very dangerous machinery and operators need to be alert. 2) Our products go on the vehicles you drive, so you want to make sure the people putting it together, and the ones checking it for quality are on the ball. Failures that make it to the auto manufacturers can be dangerous and even life-threatening. 3) Bad behavior begets bad behavior. We’ve had to fire people who’ve come up positive on random screenings before, and found ‘nests’ of drug abuse among other associated employees as well.
Our supervisors are also trained to use ‘reasonable suspicion’ criteria if they suspect someone is on something or drunk while they’re working.
“Who can make a coherent argument that drug tests are unnecessary with that type of track record?”
I dunno, ask Obama.
One more thing my husband wanted me to add - and something that might have a LOT more to do with your inability to find qualified applicants than any drug-testing...
There really is a small community of qualified machinists (I’m not talking about assembly line workers, though and it seems two of you are). Once your company has a bad reputation in an area you will find it extremely hard to find those workers. Even if you up your pay, benefits, etc... if you’ve got (for instance) a manager that’s hard to work with, or someone who hasn’t the first clue about actual machining, but tries to tell the machinist how they should make a part and will not listen to the machinist when they tell them why it will not work to do one operation before another (for example), then even if the person is starving they will not go to work for you as it’s not worth the stress, and they will simply go elsewhere and not even bother applying.
We saw this happen first-hand with a company where we live. And, even if they were to fire the manager that got them the bad reputation it’s going to be VERY hard for them to get anyone in the door. Word of mouth in the industry travels quickly. I’m honestly expecting for the company I’m speaking of to be completely out of business within the next two years or so. They simply don’t have enough qualified workers left that are willing to put up with the one manager - and they refuse to fire him because he’s their friend from childhood. They’ve lost CUSTOMERS due to this person as well, and they still refuse to believe that he’s the problem. DH has seen guys lured in with promises of a huge raise, and two to three weeks later they are back at their old job simply because it is insane at the other company in regard to stress.
Don’t always assume it is the workers who are the ones causing the problems - sometimes people hire supervisors and managers who haven’t a clue, and think that with some business degree they can walk into a shop and do a good job.
Sometimes the attitude of upper management and supervisors can have a lot to do with the attitude of your workers, and the quality of work they do for you. The way it sounds like some of you view these people is kind of disturbing, honestly. [And, I’ve been in management - albeit in retail - so it’s not like I hate all management or anything of the sort. I know it’s not easy at times, at all - especially with this younger generation who really are a lot lazier than mine (Gen X), or especially in comparison to the one before me.]