Is it appropriate for employers to test staff for drugs or alcohol? How reliable are these results? Why should some one invade your privacy? Do drug testing determine your skills level for a job? What do drug testing in the work force prove? The arguments against drug testing are it is excessively invasive, may damage relations between employers and employees, and could hamper the recruitment and retention of good staff. In 1986 the Regan administration recommended a drug-testing program for employers. In 1991 The Omnibus Transportation Employee testing act of 1991 were passed. It required mandatory drug testing in trucking and other industries. Over the past 25 years drug testing in the military has increase. Today, approximately 62% of all employers in the US have mandatory drug testing program. Drug testing in the work force have been a very controversial topic ever since. Drug testing should not be in the workplace since it does not measure on the job impairment, do not prevent accidents and is an invasion of privacy.
There is no clear evidence that drug testing at work has a significant deterrent effect. Drug testing is not a measure of current intoxication and will reveal information about drug use that can have no impact on safety, productivity or performance. Drug testing is designed to detect and punish conduct that is usually engaged in off-duty and off the employer's premises - that is, in private. Employers who conduct random drug tests on workers who are not suspected of using drugs are policing private behavior that has no impact on job performance. Someone may test positive after taking a drug days, weeks or months before. People not generally required to organize their lives to maximize their productivity at work...
... middle of paper ...
...ation and labor.
Oversight hearing on drug testing in the workplace. Hearing before the sub- committee on Employment opportunities of the committee on Education and
Labor, House of Representatives.
Durham, Robert, Eugene. Labor Education and Research center. Oregon Univ., and
Others and problems in the workplace: AIDS, Drug Testing, Sexual harassment, and Smoking Restrictions LERC Monograh series No. 7. Second
Edition. n.p.: 1989. ERIC. Web. 2 Dec. 2013.
Elliot, Karen, and Kyna Shelley. “Effects of Drugs and Alcohol on Behavior, Job
Performance, And workplace safety.” Journal of Employment Counseling
43.3 (2006): 130. ERIC. Web. 2 Dec. 2013
“One Hundredth Congress,” Second Session n.p. 1988. ERIC. Web. 20 Nov. 2013.
Zarlone, Tersa. “Drug testing in the workplace is a sensitive issue.” Caribbean Business
29.39. (2001): 38 Caribbean search. Web. 20 Nov. 2013
As much as 95% of employers favor urine testing as a method for drug testing, and this one piece of statistic may have positively affected the trend and demand for synthetic urine over the years.
Web. The Web. The Web. 13 Nov. 2013. Bartlett, Bruce.
...ult, and some times it does not give a result at all. It is unfair because it only targets certain workers; mainly low wage employees. It is unjust because people are automatically accused of using drugs, and that is why the drug test is given. Drug testing should not be abolished, but it should be a more controlled issue since it is something everyone in the US must go through.
One of the most common arguments in favor of drug testing in the workplace is to prevent occupational injuries and associated costs. There is also a concern with lost productivity due to impairment caused by illicit drug use while on the job. A study found that “the annual costs of these workplace injuries and illnesses...
Many people view drug testing in schools as a good aspect of our school systems. Schools require random drug testing for students in sports. These rates show that random drug testing lower illegal substance use. A pro for random drug testing, can be that it helps regulate the use of drugs in our teenagers. If a teenager happens to test positive, the school and parents can take immediate action to stop the problem before it progresses. They can refer the student to a counselor or if needed to a rehab center. If students know they can be randomly tested, they can see this as a sign to get help. Drug testing can make schools safer and also lower the rates of drug use in schools.
Web. The Web. The Web. 28 Feb. 2014. Hoggart, Simon.
The. Web. The Web. The Web. 24 Feb. 2014. Glynn, Sarah Jane, and Nancy Wu.
The ethics of drug testing has become an increased concern for many companies in the recent years. More companies are beginning to use it and more people are starting more to have problems with it. The tests are now more than ever seen as a way to stop the problems of drug abuse in the workplace. This brings up a very large question. Is drug testing an ethical way to decide employee drug use? It is also very hard to decide if the test is an invasion of employee privacy. “The ethical status of workplace drug testing can be expressed as a question of competing interests, between the employer’s right to use testing to reduce drug related harms and maximize profits, over against the employee’s right to privacy, particularly with regard to drug use which occurs outside the workplace.” (Cranford 2) The rights of the employee have to be considered. The Supreme Court case, Griswold vs. Connecticut outlines the idea that every person is entitled to a privacy zone. However this definition covers privacy and protection from government. To work productively especially when the work may be physical it is nearly impossible to keep one’s privacy. The relationship between employer and employee is based on a contract. The employee provides work for the employer and in return he is paid. If the employee cannot provide services because of problems such as drug abuse, then he is violating the contract. Employers have the right to know many things about their employees.
of the book. Vol. 24. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'? Berkeley, CA: University of California, 1984.
Web. The Web. The Web. 14 May 2014. Stanley, Jay.
A basic argument for the anti drug testing is the simple fact that random drug testing in schools would be an invasion of privacy. The fourth amendment to our constitution which states “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.” was put in place to protect citizens of this country against policies like the random drug tests. Without probable cause there is no need to do random drug tests, what happens to those children who have tried a drug such as “pot” and not liked it. If a random drug test happens to take place within a month of the time that child experimented with the drug, then they will suffer great consequences depending on the rules of that school. I...
Vol. 3. What is the difference between a'smart' and a'smart'?
Mandatory drug tests have proven to help teenagers reduce the use of drugs and alcohol in their daily lives. If young people get used to it when they are young, it’s proven that they would have a difficult time trying to loss their addiction to the substance. Helps the person without any criminal chargers but with all the help needed. They even have different types of drug tests to show the time period of when the person might have taken a drug recently.
The use of drug tests is an expenditure that many schools are new to; they have to start spending more money than they are originally use to. The costs of the testing is an expansive process (Lombardo 2015). To add insult to injury, the results do not have a 100% accuracy, because nothing is perfect (Stinson 2007). The drug testing system has its flaws. One person maybe come back with results showing that they have taken drugs, but when in all reality they have never laid eyes on drugs. This could lead to a magnitude of innocents being looked upon as guilty. Combining these two flaws, leads to a major predicament. The school is paying for a test that is not working at an effective rate, making the school use more money on a process that is not working to help the students that actually need the help. Another difficulty, is that there is not much evidence that suggests that the testing actually affects the outcome of drug use in school (The Effectiveness of Mandatory-Random Student Drug Testing). To put it simply, no one wants to buy something that is not going to work at a perfect efficiency