I did a presentation about pre-employment drug testing and how it should be abolished at school, and I got a lot of scrutiny. I used the the following premises in my argument.
1.) Not everyone who uses drugs is a hazardous/costly/unproductive worker
2.) Not everyone who doesnt use drugs is a good/beneficial/ hard working worker.
3.) Therefore, drug use should not be a sole determinant.
Then I stated cases in which failing a drug test in some companies can get you immediately rejected from potential employment. I then concluded with the idea of evaluating on performance(and in the case of pre-employment, past performance; i.e. past employers, GPA, etc.) to determine qualification for employment.
A fellow peer commented on whether or not drug users are likely to be worse workers than non drug users. I made the rebuttal that that statement was a stereotype, and may have some truth to it, but it should not be used to conclude that all drug users make bad employees.
Thoughts?
2007-11-30
14:42:13
·
8 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Law & Ethics