What test is there to show if you're an alcoholic and therefore will likely take a drink during the shift?

At my work we have what they call a "fitness for duty" exam that you may be asked to take if you're acting "funny". If you seem to function at work just fine you are safe from unwarranted investigation or otherwise known as unreasonable searches.

 

You've answered your own question. The fact that it's still in your system makes you a liability. >It's still in your system.< and you're at work. The test doesn't tell you how recently you were smoking, and as the employee getting busted you have a vested interest in lying about it..."yeah boss, but that was weeks ago"...right, try this morning with your Wheaties. That's why there is zero tollerance.

 

Guarantee? Who said anything about a guarantee. It goes without saying (or so I thought anyway) there are no guarantees. UAs are only a tool.

On a philosophical note, more than anything it comes down to the individual. The individual knows that drug use is illegal, and drug use is against company policy too. Yet the individual knowingly and willingly uses drugs. Here is where I find a credibility problem. The health and safety issues aside, if a person knowingly and willingly violates the law and company policy all in the name of getting high, then they have zero credibility and I don't want them working for me.

 

just_brian,

The residual alkaloids that can give a positive are completely inactive from the standpoint of the psychoative properties of THC. Meaning you need not be "high" to test positive unlike blood alcohol test which demonstrate that you are in fact intoxicated by virtue of the test results.

 

Sometimes (I really hope I get this quote right) "the law is an ***."

 

Honestly it wouldn't bother me at all. I would just quit drinking. No big deal. Granted I like a beer once in a while, but it is not somthing I need to function or to have fun. Honestly if you feel that you really need alcohol or illegal drugs in your life then you may already have or be in line for some serious problems.

 

It's not a question of need but a question of personal responsibility. I don't think it appropriate to question one's personal life as long as it has not become an issue on the job. I may not want my company having a "gay" image but I don't feel I have a right to prohibit behavior on the part of my employees that has nothing to do with my business.

 

There has to be a line drawn somewhere. What we need is a drug test that tells the employer what timea nd what day the drug was taken. Until then, better safe than sorry. If an employee gets hurt and goes to the hospital and is found to be "high", the employer gets sued over it.

 

Better safe than sorry is the same reasoning behind "homeland" inspired reductions in civil liberties.

 

Personally im all for testing i just left a job at a dealership that employees had a REALLY bad usage problem. I personally am a non user and i think anybody who works around equipment is a safety hazard to themselves and to me. Oh and this place had a "strict no drug tolerance policy" and now i see exactly what those policies are worth

 

Never heard of such a thing. Of course, anybody can sue anybody over anything, but judges can, and often do, throw frivolous cases out of court. In many cases of on-the-job accidents, a drug test is standard procedure in the establishment of liability.

 

Therein lies the problem. It seems so easy to setup programs so that the lazy man can paint with a broad brush...at the expense of our freedom.

Deal with it as it happens. Not as if it will happen. If Joe tokes a little to satisfy his cravings, so be it. I like to partake of a little caffeine sometimes myself. Just make Joe aware of the consequences if he shows up stoned. "Personal Responsibilty"

 

It is also a question of want. Do you want to keep your job, if so then abide by to policys your company has set forth. Dont like them? Then go find another job, or start your own company.

This can also be applied to the post about drug testing and drivers licences that I made above. If this was to happen and you still want to do drugs, or drink even with the 30 day test you proposed above then dont drive.

Keep in mind that I dont want to flame anyone just looking for a good debate.

 

I agree with drug testing, I would also agree with alchohol testing if it were the law. I also agree with some who said -occasional users aren't the problem. I also disagree with that last statement. An occasional alchohol bender gets people killed, not from the person being drunk mind you, but because of the diminished capacity from the hangover.

I have read a lot about both sides. I don't like the "like it or leave" attitude. I also don't like the attitude that our government shouldn't be involved. Sometimes the root of the problem is as plain as the nose on our face but we don't see it. I blame most of the problems on our "Sue" happy scoiety. If we had a justice system that had some oversight we wouldn't be in this situation. If a person high on drugs or hung over from alchohol causes an accident, that person and that person alone should be responsible. If the forklift he was driving was faulty or the person wasn't trained to use it properly, the company who hired him should be sued for the damages. Sueing for damages should also include some limits on the pain and suffering end. Lets get real supervisors don't have the time to do monitor each and every person working their shift in most cases.

The only drugs I have ever taken had labels on the bottles warning me of the dangers. I also support preventing people who could be dangerous to others like pilots, bus drivers, etc, from working while using prescription drugs. Most ariline companies have this same restriction and also have a restriction "from bottle to throttle". Even with the restriction and the experience we still see educated people we trust with our lives getting in the cockpit. We must strive to separate these people from those jobs and drug testing is only one of the methods.

Do you realize under todays laws those two Northwestern pilots could go to any other airlines and apply and Northwestern is restricted from providing any information as to why they left Northwestern. What sense does that make.

 

Hillbillywagon,

What if you've had the job for many years but the "drug testing policy" is new? What if someone at your work doesn't like you and spreads rumors to get you in hot water? If you have nothing to hide just take the test right? Search your car at the checkpoint, no problem. We'd like to come in your house and look around, fine.