Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Ethics of drug testing
Ethics of drug testing
Unethical dilemma drug testing
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Ethics of drug testing
Legal Challenges. When discussing the use of drug testing at the work place for pre-employment screening or on the job testing, we must consider the legal and ethical implications. Those who are in favor of drug testing claim that the testing itself acts as a deterrent in the use of illegal drugs and will also detect the use of illegal drugs which could impair employees resulting in injuries, accidents, lost productivity and ultimately liability concerns. Those in favor also refer to federal laws such as the Controlled Substances Act and take a zero tolerance approach to their employment policy. On the other hand those who argue against drug testing claim ethical violations of privacy and in some cases seek protection under state and federal laws such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, not always successfully. In the case of Raytheon v. Hernandez, the employee sought protection under the Americans with Disabilities Act which “prohibits discrimination against individuals with a drug addiction, although it permits an employer to act against an employer because of current drug abuse” (Witlin 2004). There is also a trend in the United States for the decriminalization of marijuana for personal and/or medical use which creates conflicts for employers. Employers have the responsibility to interpret both federal and state laws when determining their stance and policies when it comes to drug testing at the work place.
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...
... middle of paper ...
...red with the employer there is still the possibility and again a gross invasion of personal privacy.
This is a hotly argued topic especially when it comes to marijuana which a growing portion of the population view less of a threat over other illegal drugs or even alcohol. For the United State the medical marijuana issue will not be resolved until changes are made at the federal level to decriminalize or even fully legalize its distribution and use. Until that time it is up to employers to build their policies around applicable laws. I think Jeffrey A. Mello put it best in saying “employers have to balance the competing issue of the employer’s right and duty to establish and maintain safe work environment with their ethical, if not legal, obligations to reasonably accommodate employees with disabilities who may require prescribed or recommended drugs” (Mello 2013).
...g went to the fact that even though the business did not purposely discriminate, it did in fact due to a policy that is discriminatory in nature. In other words, the true reason for the firing was directly related to substance abuse. Although the employee was technically not let go due to the abuse specifically, the fact that this occurred in fact is enough to render the policy unfair. I feel that this law provides great value to my workplace as, it protects those who have made mistakes at the workplace due to a disability. In this case it was substance abuse, but the same concept could be applied to other conditions that alter behavior.
The chapter, Selling in Minnesota, had some disturbing information about the low wage life. As I read, I learned that every place the author went to apply, such as a Wal-Mart and a Home Depot type place called Menards, required the applicant to pass a drug test. The author went out and had to buy detox for $30, but can be up to $60. Also, I learn that 81% of employers do drug test their future employees. I don’t like this statistic, in part because I tried getting a job at Marshall Field’s restaurant and they required me to pass a drug test. Luckily, another employer called me before my scheduled drug screening (which I had planned on passing by being really sneaky and using the urine of a friend of mine), so I took that job offer and everything worked out well. The reason I don’t agree with the drug testing required to access most entry-level jobs, is because the only drugs they actually test for is Marijuana. Cocaine and heroine leave the body within three days, and other drugs aren’t even tested for. So that leaves the most commonly used illicit drug, and one that has the least affect on the user, to be tested for.
...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.
The Drug Enforcement Administration has many careers and responsibilities within the the entire agency. there are many different careers like Special agent, Diversion investigator, Intelligence research specialist, Forensic scientist, and Student/entry level positions. Theres a very big responsibility of the Drug Enforcement Administration and thats to Enforce laws on drugs and protect the people from harmful substances. Many harmful substances are getting out to the people everyday so the DEA must take actions against this threat to try and prevent or catch it before its to late. Many people try to get in with the DEA but its just as difficult as becoming a police officer now a days. There are many pros and cons to working for the Drug Enforcement Administration some good and some not so good.
Nonviolent drug offenders should not be given mandatory jail sentences because the prisons don’t have the room, it already costs a lot of money to run the prisons, and by them putting the offenders into prison they are taking a parent away from a child who may need them the most. Drugs are illegal and yes most people involved with them are or become dangerous. Those are the types of offenders that should be thrown into prison especially if they are the type that harm our Law Enforcement. But if the offenders are nonviolent there is no need to lock them up when we can’t even afford to. They could get some other type of punishment for getting involved in the illegal activity.
The issue of medical marijuana has become very controversial at work places. This follows the move by several states to legalize marijuana for medical reasons. As a result, many employers are caught in the quagmire of what they need to do with employees who use drugs such as medical marijuana while at work. A study conducted in 2007 by the Americans for Safe Access revealed that there were about three hundred thousand Americans using marijuana for medical purposes (Schubert 218).
Today, approximately 62% of all employers in the US have a mandatory drug testing program. Drug testing in the workforce has been a very controversial topic ever since. Drug testing should not be in the workplace since it does not measure on the job impairment, does 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.
It is annually estimated that the economic cost alone is $215 billion dollars that are being contributed to drug trafficking in the United States. According to the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy it is projected that nearly $61 billion dollars are being used towards criminal justice such as criminal investigation, prosecution and incarceration, $11 billion dollars are for the healthcare costs as in drug treatment and drug-related medical consequences, $120 billion dollars are lost in productivity, due to the labor participation costs in drug abuse treatment, incarceration and premature death. As stated in the White House Office of National Drug Control Policy it is assessed that full-time workers who were on current use of drugs were more likely to miss workdays due to illnesses and injuries. As mentioned i...
The legalization of marijuana has been a highly debated topic for many of years. Since the first president to the most recent, our nation’s leaders have consumed the plant known as weed. With such influential figures openly using this drug why is it so frowned upon? Marijuana is considered a gateway drug, a menace to society, and mentally harmful to its consumers. For some people weed brings a sense of anxiety, dizziness, or unsettling feeling. Like alcohol, tobacco or any other drug, those chemicals may not respond well with their body. For other people marijuana brings joy, a sense of relief, and takes the edge off of every day stress. For those who are associated with cannabis, purposes usually range from a relaxant, or cash crop, to more permissible uses such as medicine, and ingredient to make so many other materials. We now need to look at what would change if marijuana were legal. Benefits to the economy and agriculture, health issues, and crime rates are three areas worth looking at. Deliberating on the pros and cons of this plant we can get a better understanding for marijuana. From there it will be easier to make a clear consensus on what is best for the nation.
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.
The Pros and Cons of Drug Legalization Should drugs be legalized? Drugs are resources that are capable of affecting the American economy in many ways—both positively and negatively. Drugs often have a bad name, even though they help us everyday in medical cases. and the drugs with the worst reputations are not the most abused drugs. One may benefit from the legalization of drugs in many ways, while others would suffer greatly.
required to submit a drug test; it puts a lot of pressure on them making them aware that they
It is a company’s ethical responsibility to not hire an applicant who requests reasonable accommodation for medical marijuana even with the Americans with Disabilities Act. This recommendation can be supported by the five ethical philosophies. If a company has zero-tolerance drug policy, they must enforce those guidelines. The only exception would be a company operating in a state where it is legal to use medical marijuana and the company does not have a drug-free policy. Employers must attempt to provide a safe and productive workplace, but they must do so without violating individual rights and federal and state
When I use to work for a staffing agency in Human Resources we had an employee accidently hit other employee with a forklift and cause permanent damage to a person’s ankle and it turned out that the forklift driver was under the influence of marijuana. Can you imagine what the other person had to go through all because another employee was under the
Mandatory drug testing is proven to help reduce the number of kids who do drugs (Journal of General