This whole thing about drug testing at work is insanity isn't it?

No it is not a real job, it's entertainment. Those players have no more 'right's' than any actor in a movie. If the owner thinks the fans expect a certain image from his team it's perfectly in their right to ask the players to meet that image or find a different team.



Pre-emptive drug testing is just one of many things eroding at one of the pillars of our free society;

The presumption of innocence

 

:2thumbsup:

 

wow, I wish I was British.....
Passed a urine drug test using Puri-Blend, got it at GNC, it worked well b/c I toke several times a day. I dont get why an office would drug test, you almost need drugs to get thru a day in an oppressive office but maybe it would be a bad idea to run heavy equipment while blazed or gripped..IDK but the whole drug testing thing BLOWS THE GOAT. We should be able to toke at our desks.....

 

haha that stuff sounds good then!

 

Ok, lets get down to some facts, some good, some disturbing.

Pre-Employment and random workplace screening is not implemented at the federal level, it is controlled completely by the individual states, with the exception of certain "high risk", federal government contracts workers and anything that falls under the auspices of the DOT (Department of Transportation), and as such you are going to have a wide array of laws and policies in effect. Keep that in mind Hoppi,

In some states collection of urine is not considered "invasive" in others it is. Hair follicle collection and blood tests are considered "invasive" and as such are done very infrequently ans almost never for workplace screening. I know in Ca. an employer would essentially have to get a search warrant to take an employees blood sample.
Hair follicle testing isn't as restricted legally, but it is extortionately expensive and while being the most thorough, it is the least reliable indicator of current usage considering it can contain metabolites of substances ingested up to almost 18 months previously. The only company I have ever heard of that utilizes hair follicle testing is AAA, Automobile Club of America.

For testing for current/present drug use in order of reliability/time frame it goes
1-saliva /sweat
2-blood
3-urine
4-hair follicle

Some workplaces use saliva testing and it is gaining popularity as it is considered the least invasive collection method, but also has limitations.

Concerning invasion of privacy, again that is a state by state situation.
I can only speak to California's laws, so...
In Ca. an employer has to provide very good cause to have an employee tested and for the most part random drug screens are very rarely done in Ca. companies with a few exceptions and those exceptions are based on the federally mandated screening situations mentioned above.
The California state constitution even has specific wording concerning privacy issues and that umbrella also covers drug screening.
So employers who conduct random screens in Ca. run a very high risk of incurring lawsuits from such testing , and there have already been a number of them on the books, many settled in favor of the employee.

It also pays to know the laws and loopholes with these laws. Before I mentioned that companies doing contract work for the government are subject to random screening, a slippery loophole to be aware of, here's why.

Suppose you work for a company that makes paintbrushes and your boss has never worried about screening so it has never been done.
Now some federal yahoo wants some limited edition commemorative paintbrushes made and has contracted the company you work for to fulfill the order.
Guess what, every employee there just became federal employees for the duration of the contract and as such are subject to random screening!

Now let's move onto the disturbing part.
Dammit! I can't find the references I was thinking of, anyway...

If a person does a bit of archeological digging around they may find that there are essentially two labs that do the majority of all the pre-employment screening done in America, LabCorp and Quest Diagnostics.

The info I was trying to resurrect had to do with the implementation of the drug screening programs in the early eighties, the promotion and instance on "how much safer" the workplace could be, etc. etc, etc, can all be traced back to these two companies.
Essentially what they did was sell the idea to the Reagan administration, then pretty much went around the country on a promotional tour about drugs in the workplace and, PRAISE THE LORD !!!, they also were there to provide the solution to America's companies, for a small fee of course.

From what I remember it was an idea to funnel funds into other research divisions of the companies.

So in a nut shell, these companies "sort of" created a problem and then provided the solution to the problem.

If anyone else knows about this, please share.


Also if you live in a medical marijuana state,
GET YOU RECOMMENDATION!!!!


I lost a job due to a failed test. Working as a large format press operator, I also occasionally made deliveries in the company vans and as such fell under the auspices of the DOT.
Walked into work one day, clocked in, manager walked over to me and the one other person who did deliveries, handed us cups, paperwork and a map, then said, be back by 10 AM.
That was it, no warnings, no nothing, but it was completely within the DOT guidelines for testing.
Since I live in a MMJ state, the first thing that happened was I got a phone call from the Dr. that oversees the lab. She said I tested potitive for Marijuana then asked if I had a doctors recommendation for cannabis, because if I did, she would report a negative result to the employer and by virtue of HIPPA laws, could lose her license and be sued if she told my employer about the results.
Wish I had my damn recommendation back then!!! oh well, hindsight and all that.


I hope that helps sort it out a little more for ya Hoppi :sunny:

 

Roofing company. We don't drug test. It's their own beez-wax what they do at home. However, a close eye is kept on people when they show up. You do not want a drugged up or a drinking roofer on ANY job site and there's no confusion about that with our workers. Never have had a prob. (what am I going to do---fire myself for smoking at night?)

 

Good summary Nox.

Fuck, how this hits home. I just stopped smoking a few days ago because, I'm not pulling in enough work to pay the bills and almost all the jobs I have skills to do, to make more than Walmart wages, means testing to get hired and often, random.

Cause I'm in that DOT group.

Hadn't heard that story about the labs getting together to promote testing but not one bit surprised. And Quest is just a fucked up operation all together, don't ask how i know.

Something that stood out though was your running large format presses. That was my previous line of work, I started in Flexo doing labels and then learned offset. Ran Guetenburgs for a few years. Then I decided to learn what I wanted to do when I was a kid, fix airplanes. Fast forward to the end of the Reagan era and low and behold, drug testing for all! But, guess what? Whilst we were all being told that this is all in the name of public safety, (remember the NYC subway crash where the driver was high on weed?) what actually happened was "blue collar" jobs all fell under the new DOT rules.

So, what do we have today? We have aviation techs, inspectors, rampers, fuelers, trash picker uppers, all subject to pre-employment and random testing.

FAA inspectors? You know, the ones that make sure technicians, pilots and dispachers are safe and doing their job? No testing. Not to get hired, not random, ziltch.
Engineers for aerospace companies? Up to the employer. Bankers that fuck up entire economies? You know, like members of the Fed Reserve? Nope. Judges appointed to the bench?
If it was up to me I'd make every single judge blow a breathalyzer.

So after all these years of making drug testing law, battling it out in courts, now we have a system whereby drug testing in the line of employment is preemptive, if you're not a criminal it is considered "intrusive" to watch a piss sample, so therefore most people that are subject to testing get around it. If you're being tested due to probation or other violation, then filling the cup can and probably will be observed and the chips fall where they may.

Drug testing has done absolutely nothing to make the public safer in any way.

It's a feel good measure, the same as seeing all those uniformed TSA at the airport.


I am curious though about what you said about having a rec when you got tested. If you were tested under the DOT rules, doesn't that mean that a rec is meaningless? The governement has said that MMJ states and recs are not a valid defense for a positive result in a DOT regulated area.

 

From my understanding after researching and my conversation with the examining doctor at that time, it would be a violation of HIPPA laws because if it is prescribed/recommended by an accredited doctor, then it is part of your personal health history and as such trumps any DEA type crap.

It is a violation of HIPPA laws for ANYONE, employers, law enforcement, insurance companies, anyone to get access to your personal health history/information without your WRITTEN consent.

So not really sure how that would play out in court. In California I'm pretty sure it would end in favor of the MMJ patient.
But if you fall under the auspices of the DOT, then yeah, I make no promises.
They actually fucked up and used the company paperwork for my test instead of the DOT paperwork. I called the DOT and complained and said the test was invalid. The bitch agreed, and said she would instruct the company to either retest the sample or just supply documentation stating that they mistakenly used the wrong paperwork. Even though THEY fucked up, I was the one who ended up with the sore ass!

It has always been my impression that smaller, California based companies are less likely to want to deal with all the bullshit and expense that comes with testing, especially when the trend is for the court to uphold the privacy of the individual, at least in Ca. regarding these type of cases.

 

i won't stop smoking for the man, man.

 

you said it!

 

:ssmokeit::smash:
I honestly don't understand how anyone can do that kind of work without smoking a little weed.

I've done more roofing, carpentry and general construction work than I care to admit and I gotta tell you, my fellow stoner co-workers were some of the most hard working, conscientious and safety oriented workers out there, I never felt any safety concerns around most of them.
When I worked high-rise construction it was the tweakers and alcoholics that scared me the most.

 

@NG the only case i have heard of a follicle test was when a friend of mine was mopping floors at AT&T.

 

I love the way that this sums up the whole thing.

 

I'm sure there are many hard working stoners, as there are hard working alcoholics as well but it just takes one negligent stoner getting high on the job for a disastrous situation like this to occur...

http://www.nydailynews.com/1.1366608

 

Fucking bullshit story 'bedlam.
First he's a "crane operator" then it changes to "operating an excavator" then "running heavy equipment". Also it is all "allegedly", there is no proof of shit! POS sensationalist journalism.
I don't know how long you've worked in the industry, but boozers are the biggest 'I don't give a fuck about safety', 'just git 'er done' assholes there are, and it's extremely prevalent among heavy equipment operators.

 

works like a charm! take it from a stoner

 

You don't give the feds enough credit bro:

http://www.dot.gov/odapc/hipaa-statement

Of course stoners and alkies can be hard workers or not. Here's the deal, that's exactly how this always goes down... an incident happens, catches all the attention, and people cry out for action. A big part of the "safety sensitive" justification for all this came from a NYC train operator that was high when he caused a crash. Then, as in the story you posted, family and friends of the victim cry out for justice, for the authorities to do SOMETHING. Then add in all the vested interests vying for their piece of the pie, like testing labs drooling over all the money they're gonna make and... we wind up with shit laws like this.

Witness 9-11 and the "patriot act".

I know two former coworkers that had to take pre-employment follicle tests. The only thing that keeps it from being more widespread is that they are very expensive compared to piss tests.
Ah, fuck it. One of them was Panasonic. Not tv's, avionics.

All well and good, until you can't pay the bills. I'll go you one further, i've been saying I won't punch a clock for the man anymore. Well, when most people want to pay you McWages for good honest work, you go where you can do what you need to do. I'm not going to let "the man" take my house or fuck up my life, because I want to smoke some weed.

Now to cut to brass tacks. The reality is that people that want to smoke weed are going to smoke weed, and many simply cheat the test with synthetic piss or a donation from a buddy.
Because...
Pre-employment and randoms are not done in the context of criminality or violation of some rule or law therefore the sample collector may not observe the sample being given.
Creates a great workplace environment, don't it?

 

Finding ways around society's less desirable laws can be hard man. Takes alot more effort than most people want to put in. You never truly escape anyway.
John Lennon knew the vibe of this machine man
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njG7p6CSbCU"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njG7p6CSbCU

 

Indy, thanks for that. Truly.

Valid point as well. No, I don't want to put in the effort at this stage of the game, and I'm getting too old and beat up to give a damn about taking some moral stance, in spite. Don't feel I've been backed up against the wall hard enough yet and feel I have more to loose than not, presently. So it either gets better or, if my face winds up forced into the bricks, then the course gets shifted.

 

I have mixed feelings. One one hand I believe in individual freedom and civil liberties. One the other hand, in my line of work one seemingly insignificant wrong move can not only get yourself killed, it can also potentially kill others around you.

The problem is that the current testing methods have a better chance of catching casual pot smokers than even a daily (insert hard drug here) user.