Jeep Wrangler Forum

Jeep Wrangler Forum (http://www.wranglerforum.com/)
-   Off-Topic (http://www.wranglerforum.com/f6/)
-   -   Drug Testing..Good or Bad. (http://www.wranglerforum.com/f6/drug-testing-good-or-bad-12126.html)

Levinoss 10-05-2007 08:14 AM

Drug Testing..Good or Bad.
 
New hire Screening, invasion of privacy or needed?

/discuss :)


~Lev

02Prove 10-05-2007 08:18 AM

I just think they should legalize marijuana. I haven't smoked in a looooong time and probably wouldn't but I see smoking weed pretty much the same as drinking. If you come to work impaired you should be fired...but smoking pot every now and then shouldn't screw you out of getting a job.

IMO.

skeeter 10-05-2007 08:34 AM

It all depends on the job.

Jase 10-05-2007 08:43 AM

I'm all for New Hire screening and random tests. I do NOT want you on my staff if you cannot abide by our drug laws. Laws are not arbitrary.

In my line of work, my staff's character is of utmost importance. If they are singled out and are said to have made a bad judgement because they were high.. how could they prove against it? They could not, I would have to test them and with a postive test I would terminate them immediately to save the character and reputation of my department.

Levinoss 10-05-2007 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skeeter (Post 145995)
It all depends on the job.

explain :)

OdhinnsChick 10-05-2007 09:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levinoss (Post 145989)
New hire Screening, invasion of privacy or needed?

/discuss :)


~Lev

Drugs are bad, Mkay? So is alcohol but we've been there done that and it didn't work. :D

Levinoss 10-05-2007 09:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OdhinnsChick (Post 146005)
Drugs are bad, Mkay? So is alcohol but we've been there done that and it didn't work. :D

Would you rather a drunk on the job or a stoner? :confused:

~Lev

OdhinnsChick 10-05-2007 09:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levinoss (Post 146006)
Would you rather a drunk on the job or a stoner? :confused:

~Lev

Probably a stoner tbh.

pick 10-05-2007 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levinoss (Post 146002)
explain :)

There are jobs that do not need a required drug testing. Riding on a mower all day, I really wouldn't see the point, and I'm sure there are others jobs.

I think most jobs should require it, along with randoms, not just the new hire test, or after you are injured or have a near miss. If you come to work drunk or high, its a choice you make, and take the chances of getting caught, and whatever happens with that.

I understand people use it, and its about the same drinking, but its still not legal. If it was legal, hold it to the same standards as drinking on the job.

Odhinn 10-05-2007 10:03 AM

In my chosen field I am glad they have many randoms and new hire screening. Enough death happens when a 10 thousand ton train and a non-attentive general public are involved without the help of people being impaired by drugs or alcohol.

hutchman 10-05-2007 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jase (Post 145999)
I'm all for New Hire screening and random tests. I do NOT want you on my staff if you cannot abide by our drug laws. Laws are not arbitrary.

In my line of work, my staff's character is of utmost importance.........

Well put. If we all had integrity and character, the world would be a better place today.

bernm8r 10-05-2007 10:38 AM

In my line of work a 2578 gross ton vessel would require drug testing. You would be suprised just how many ships are out there in the open ocean. the problem lies in that crews rotate with 3 months on and 3 months off so technically they are on vacation. I am sure some smoke while off but clean up 30 days prior to going back to work. Drug testing I feel is mostly to find the frequent abuser a weekend toker may pop positive but the daily smoker would for sure. that being said I woould rather have a stoner drive me home than a drunk.
[IMG][img=http://img115.imageshack.us/img115/6163/shelburneportsidepagesisg5.th.jpg][/IMG]

skeeter 10-05-2007 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levinoss (Post 146002)
explain :)

No!

































Ok ok.
Security, machinery operators, medical workers, drivers and so on need testing, basically anyone with a job that can put someone elses safety at risk I don't have a problem testing.
The checker at Wally world? not so much. There are jobs where it just doesn't matter.
Now don't get me wrong. I think it's the owners right to decide if he wants to test his employees and if they don't like it they're free to work somewhere else. I just don't want the government deciding that everybody needs testing.

02Prove 10-05-2007 01:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skeeter (Post 146093)
I just don't want the government deciding that everybody needs testing.

x2

Levinoss 10-05-2007 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skeeter (Post 146093)
No!





Ok ok.
Security, machinery operators, medical workers, drivers and so on need testing, basically anyone with a job that can put someone elses safety at risk I don't have a problem testing.
The checker at Wally world? not so much. There are jobs where it just doesn't matter.
Now don't get me wrong. I think it's the owners right to decide if he wants to test his employees and if they don't like it they're free to work somewhere else. I just don't want the government deciding that everybody needs testing.

What gives them the right to test someone unless they are doing drugs or drunk on the job?

Just because someone smokes say weed on the weekend, does that mean they will come on the job and light up?

~Lev

OdhinnsChick 10-05-2007 02:24 PM

Don't make me search the house next time I come over Bro. :/

whiteyj 10-05-2007 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levinoss (Post 146100)
What gives them the right to test someone unless they are doing drugs or drunk on the job?

Just because someone smokes say weed on the weekend, does that mean they will come on the job and light up?

~Lev

Because they are "the man" and are running companies or governments and making the rules. Just wait one of therse days you'll reach a ripe old age and have responsibilities like raising kids. Your opinions will swing around. Contrary to popular belief it's not that bad being a grown up and a responsible contributor to society. Afterall we still have our toys....They are just more expensive.:D

skeeter 10-05-2007 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levinoss (Post 146100)
What gives them the right to test someone unless they are doing drugs or drunk on the job?

The fact that they own the business. They took the risks, they invested the time and money to start it and it's their asses if it fails.
If the employee doesn't like the rules he or she is free to work elsewhere.
Freedom is great as long as it's freedom for everyone.

Quote:

Just because someone smokes say weed on the weekend, does that mean they will come on the job and light up?

~Lev
nope, no more than a drinker is likely to drink on the job.
Drug tests look for more than just weed, many mind altering substances can have lingering or even recurring effects that could pose a danger in certain jobs.

Personally, I all for legalizing weed, it's been proven over and over again that it's less dangerous than alcohol.
I have no interest in using it but I can't understand why we waste billions of dollars and thousands of lives fighting something less harmful than Budweiser.

Levinoss 10-05-2007 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skeeter (Post 146116)


nope, no more than a drinker is likely to drink on the job.
Drug tests look for more than just weed, many mind altering substances can have lingering or even recurring effects that could pose a danger in certain jobs.

Personally, I all for legalizing weed, it's been proven over and over again that it's less dangerous than alcohol.
I have no interest in using it but I can't understand why we waste billions of dollars and thousands of lives fighting something less harmful than Budweiser.

Thats the comment I was looking for kudos to you.


Quote:

. Just wait one of therse days you'll reach a ripe old age and have responsibilities like raising kids. Your opinions will swing around.
Have I stated my opinion on the subject? All I have been doing is asking questions to see what everything thought on the subject.

My opinion is It's a iffy subject but I agree with skeeter for the most part.

~Lev

02Prove 10-05-2007 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by whiteyj (Post 146111)
...Just wait one of therse days you'll reach a ripe old age and have responsibilities like raising kids. Your opinions will swing around.

Ummm... I'm raising kids and feel the same way. Sort of.

I think they should legalize weed (I don't smoke it) and tax the shit out of it like they to alcohol and tobacco. As far as drug testing goes I feel that it should most definately be left up to the business. Like it was said previously, "if you don't like it go work elsewhere". However, under no circumstances do I believe the government should have a hand in regulating this for others.

jeeperman 10-05-2007 03:42 PM

What I was going to say has been said a couple of times above. If you don't like the policy, work elsewhere. Companies are just evaluating the risk they are taking on an employee... If a company hires someone, spends 10's of thousands of dollars in training, and then they get picked up for cocaine possesion, they are possibly out an employee and have to spend that same 10's of thousands of dollars to train someone new.

I am really indifferent to the whole pot thing, I don't personally smoke it, but don't care if you do. But until the law is changed (if ever) it is still an illegal substance, and you can/will go to jail if you get caught with enough of it, so companies have to cover themselves.

1BLKJP 10-05-2007 03:54 PM

If people aren't bright enough to pass a drug test when they start then they don't rightly deserve the job.

MouthfulOfGrass 10-05-2007 04:22 PM

It's funny how tobacco & alcohol are legal, & taxed. And really no one goes out of their way to grow tobacco in their own back yard or closet, and no one really brews their own moonshine to get out of the expense of buying it from a store & paying the taxes. Wouldn't you think it would work the same with marijuana ?

As far as testing, I work in a machine shop and initial & random tests are necessary. Not for personal safety so much (although someone impaired might be more prone to hurting themself) but for the sake of the owners expense of getting a $100,000 machine repaired because some guy was woozy & daydreaming (trippin').
If there was a law, or a way to have a person who is a drug or alcohol user to be held responsible if an accident or damage was caused by his/her impairment........that would be one thing. But right now a guy can come to work drunk and do $20,000 in damage to a machine, then walk away from it.
Owners/bosses need something to protect them, and random testing is what they have.

But the government shouldn't be the one deciding who should be tested in the non-government workplace. Leave it up to the private sector owner/boss to decide what they need for their particular situation.

cnt487 10-05-2007 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BLKJP (Post 146149)
If people aren't bright enough to pass a drug test when they start then they don't rightly deserve the job.

x2.....I was a daily toker for about 8 years, up until bout 6 months ago. With that being said, I surprisingly have mixed emotions about it. I'm in management where I work and it never hindered my ability to do my job acceptionally well. At the same time, now that I don't smoke anymore, I definitely feel a difference in how well I can perform my job. I feel I have much more energy and I am mentally on the ball now, not saying I wasn't before, but the level I am at now definitely surpasses the level I was at over those years. Back then I would have told you it doesn't effect anything long term (just like alcohol), now since I'm not a daily toker, I cannot say that. It definitely had it's effects as a daily user.

A weekend every now and then, thats a different story, I see no problem at all.

Now from a business perspective, they have every right in the world to test and re-test if desired. If the employee doesn't like it, or like stated above can't pass the test, there are a lot of other employment opportunities out there for ya, go elsewhere.

activelydying 10-05-2007 05:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1BLKJP (Post 146149)
If people aren't bright enough to pass a drug test when they start then they don't rightly deserve the job.

I agree.

woody_k 10-05-2007 07:24 PM

To answer the OP's question. I am for drug screening. Not for just certian jobs but any job the boss wants. Random of everyone not just individuals who the boss thinks is lacking in performance and is looking for a way to fire a person. And yes I think Peace Officers should be included. (myself a peace officer).

The problem with stoners or the legalization of marijuana is that many stoners don't stop at just marijuana. Other illegal drugs are taken as well that are much more dangerous. Now alcoholics on the other hand very seldom partake in any other drugs.

The next question I will guess one would be asking is where do I get my information....6+ years of dealing with addicts in the drug Court in San Bernardino County.

deverhart 10-05-2007 07:34 PM

Im pissed that I get picked for a random every time we are due for randoms... doesnt seem so random :-( Regardless I am drug free personally and fully support testing especially in my field where I have to make safety sensitive decisions as part of my daily job

OdhinnsChick 10-05-2007 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woody_k (Post 146225)
To answer the OP's question. I am for drug screening. Not for just certian jobs but any job the boss wants. Random of everyone not just individuals who the boss thinks is lacking in performance and is looking for a way to fire a person. And yes I think Peace Officers should be included. (myself a peace officer).

The problem with stoners or the legalization of marijuana is that many stoners don't stop at just marijuana. Other illegal drugs are taken as well that are much more dangerous. Now alcoholics on the other hand very seldom partake in any other drugs.

The next question I will guess one would be asking is where do I get my information....6+ years of dealing with addicts in the drug Court in San Bernardino County.

I'm in agreement here as well but I also believe that alcohol and alcoholism are worse in severity, especially in long term effects (and not only to the person drinking), than MJ. I enjoy casual drinking from time to time, as do millions of other people, but I feel that the potential of abuse and its after effects are ten times of that of MJ. But MJ is already illegal and really it should stay that way. I have no answers for alcohol abuse.

rebelBullDawg325 10-05-2007 07:50 PM

well i've missed most of the convo and its too much to read. so sorry if what i say has been discussed. but heres my thoughts.....

i think its sad that the world has gotten to the pointing of needing to do random and pre-hire drug test.

i am also aware of people that do smoke and people i went to school with that smoked. and for some odd reason, some of them are very smart actually. not just dummies melted to the couch like many people would leave you to believe.

i had another point but forgot it. sorry, its been a long week. i'll come back to this thread later :)

cnt487 10-05-2007 07:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Levinoss (Post 145989)
New hire Screening, invasion of privacy or needed?

/discuss :)


~Lev

Funny how "smoke" (marijuana) wasn't even mentions in the original post and thats all this thread is about now... lol I know, i did the same thing, started talkin about weed instead of whether or not New Hire Screening is a invasion of privacy. BTW, new hire screening and random testing tests for a lot more than just weed. So really weed is probably the least of the worries for potential employers. OK, just had that thought and wanted to share it. :wavey: IBB


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:12 AM.