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 Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Correction: I gave the presentation at school, I didnt talk about school drug testing. But rather drug testing in the workplace. Sorry about the poor grammar in the first paragraph.
2007-11-30 14:43:53 · update #1
You should have asked;"... if drug testing is so important then why aren't government officials taking them?"
2007-11-30 14:48:10 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Drug testing is important. Why? The drug user may not necessarily be more dangerous, but they are more likely to break the law (obviously). In the matter of working around money or merchandise, they would be more likely to steal to pay for a habit.
Employers use it for protection. They may not be more likely to create unsafe work environment, but it only takes one time of being under the influence and causing serious bodily injury to another employee that will cause not only the drug user serious trouble, but the company as well. The company is just doing everything legally in their power to protect their best interest.
I am all for pre-employment drug screening. If you want a job, then get off the drugs. It is that simple. There is no excuse for breaking drug laws, and it is potentially dangerous to others. So what is the harm in trying to protect your best interest?
2007-11-30 22:57:31 · answer #2 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
as far as pre-employment screening I view it as an intelligence test.....if you can't figure to lay off the weed for a month before hand, you lack the common sense to have a job at that company.....there are plenty of people who fail the test...
as far as drug users being bad employees? might not be an issue with thc, but reliability issues will be noticed if crack or heroin is being used...
do you think the companies will stop there? if you smoke(cigarettes) you may not get the job...... is your body mass index a little off? you may not get the job
2007-11-30 23:09:23 · answer #3 · answered by lymanspond 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No matter what "facts" you can come up with supporting allowing a person using drugs to have employment, the insurance companies and Workmans Comp will still demand pre-employment drug testing.
2007-11-30 23:23:02 · answer #4 · answered by sensible_man 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Quite frankly I am 100% in favor of it. People who use drugs are MUCH more likely to have accidents at work, which cost the employer a bloody fortune. That cost is passed on to the consumer by raising the price of goods & services. Talk to your insurance company about this. They'll give you the statistics as well as the actual costs for worker's compensation payments, etc.
2007-11-30 22:46:50 · answer #5 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
I think is a good thing. Drug use means at least some weakness in character; and therefore could be a potential troublesome employee.
Besides any employer can set rules for employment; see nothing wrong with it.
2007-11-30 22:49:13 · answer #6 · answered by alpla 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
any employer may set his own special test for employment concerning the nature of the work in question. this is not determind by the employee or the person seeking job.
2007-12-01 03:20:17 · answer #7 · answered by babak_shojaei2000 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
well first of all, using drugs is illegal. so it seems correct that employers would not want their employees to partake in illegal activity. If you choose to use drugs then you have to be prepared for the consequences. Also. its such a liability to hire someone that tests positive on a drug test because drugs impare your thoughts and actions
2007-11-30 22:51:18 · answer #8 · answered by bella 2 · 0⤊ 2⤋