As a general rule I think urine tests are invasive and should not be used at work places unless there is cause to suspect drug use. However since most places of business now do drug tests prior to hiring then that is where these people should have the tests done. Meaning, in order to keep benefits they have to find a job, and let the company do the test for the state. The company then reports to the state and if and when they do not pass then they lose benefits until they are clean for at least a month, and go through ... I don't know say diversion or something which is less than an in house treatment center. If they are so bad they can't do that, then off to treatment they go.
2007-05-29 05:47:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Penny K 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
I relatively have already replied a question like this. initially, the reason you may desire to have a urine drug attempt is an OH&S venture. that's no longer appropriate to the morals of entertainment drug use. As you may desire to have those attempt performed you will comprehend that they could desire to be "supervised" which of direction ability that somebody has to observe you pee. are you able to think of the logistics and the fees linked with getting genuinely everyone who's on a central authority pension or receiving reward to have a supervised urine drug show on a usual foundation? it can be a nightmare! additionally, as a count number of actuality that lots of the human beings who get carry of reward from Social protection are taking legal drugs for somewhat some lawsuits linked with melancholy, psychological ailment, sleep issues etc. How could you advise we preserve that? And what of the a million% or so who're ripping off the equipment? Do you think of they gets off drugs and get a activity purely as a results of fact they fail a urine drug show? The pittance that human beings gets a commission on government reward would not purchase lots in the way of unlawful drugs and useful little alcohol so permit it flow. this concept isn't rational, achieveable or smart so why can we shop listening to it?
2016-11-26 00:25:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by deamer 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Drug Tests
http://www.usscreeningsource.com/shop/html/Integrated_EZ__4_Panel_wMeth_Urine_Drug_Tests_wAdulterationQTY_25_Tests.html
Category Index
New Items
Adulteration Test Strips
Alcohol Tests
Alco-Screen Alcohol Saliva Tests
Alco-Screen 02 Alcohol Saliva Tests
BreathScan Alcohol Breath Tests
QED Alcohol Test Kit
Drug Tests
iCassette Drug Tests
iCup Drug Test Kits
Integrated EZ Split Urine Drug Tests
Integrated EZ Drug Tests w/Adulteration
iScreen Dip Drug Test Kits
iScreen Saliva Oral Drug Tests
Rapid Urine Drug Tests
Drug & Alcohol Test Kit Packs
Drug Testing Supplies
Only the guilty need to worry!
2007-05-29 11:12:52
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
First of all - you were ignorant to AGREE to let your employer give you random urine tests. Would you agree to let them randomly search your car and home for illegal substances or overdue library books? Would you let them follow you to see if you performed any illegal activities outside of work; sold company secrets, cheated on your wife or drove 56 in a 55 zone? I am the 1st person to preach against illegal drug use or legal drug abuse, but I would NEVER give them the right to snoop into MY personal life, and yes that includes my PEE! Secondly, Don't equate what YOU volunteered to do with what people should be FORCED to do. Besides, the only test YOU should have to take is a SPELLING TEST! First word- benEfits !
2007-05-29 07:54:03
·
answer #4
·
answered by BillyTheKid 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
You did get a laugh out of me,because i aggree with you on why they don`t Drug Test people who are on welfare.That deffinently would save the goverment probably 80% of all the money they are currently giving to Drug Addicts on Welfare so they can buy some more Drugs.You know that is a really good idea.
2007-05-25 23:08:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Heike P 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yeah, the state would sure save a lot of money in welfare benefits, but if every druggie who gets benefits didn't anymore, they'd have to find another source of income. So the state is going to probably have to pay to keep them in jail for robbing your house. I personally think, if you're doing a great job at work, you should be allowed to smoke pot, drop acid, smoke crack, just like you're allowed to drink all weekend long. If the state saved all the money they're spending on incarcerating people for drug offences, they could reduce your taxes, or give you free medical insurance, or just fix the roads.
2007-05-26 18:38:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by rhea b 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
I agree with you-they should be required to take the urine test. Perhaps it would cut down on a lot of misuse of funds.
2007-05-28 18:47:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by Joan J 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
And if they don't pass the tests, what happens.
If you were to say, they would get treatment and rehabilitation, that might be appealing. But I think you would just want them to be punished. They don't get the money, healthcare, housing assistance, quality education?
What do you have in mind?
2007-05-28 04:35:36
·
answer #8
·
answered by jackbutler5555 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
I agree 110%. I have been unemployed, and to qualify you must show that you are in school and/or looking for work. To collect AFDC or something similar, all you have to do is show that you have kids... any idiot can have kids... many do...
I kind of like your idea...
2007-05-21 22:01:14
·
answer #9
·
answered by l8_nyte 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
u said it brother, i agree with u totally.
2007-05-28 12:39:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by not fair 6
·
1⤊
0⤋