it's really insane how invasive drug tests are and how people think it's totally fine for companies to do
The population seems complacent to accept that employers seek unlimited power, merely because no other channel is available for earning one's survival.
No way of relating to an abusive system is ever considered, except capitulation.
In fact, I feel alarmed at how readily many will imagine some grave threat from a hypothetical coworker who uses substances, without ever considering the threat of abandoning one's own privacy.
You act like companies do this because they want to. They do it because they can't get insurance if they don't because drugs are illegal and they refuse to insure people participating in illegal activities.
That makes no sense unless people are doing the drugs at work. Why would an insurance company not underwrite a company based on what their employees do in their free time?
My brother in law is the owner of a electrician company, we live in Washington state where cannabis is legal. His insurance company will drop him if they don't have a strong anti drug policy. It's pretty lame.
How would you prove that the drugs were only taken during off hours? Drug use is stigmatized to the point that anyone who uses illicit substances must be an addict. It is an excuse for an insurance company not to pay a claim and they simply won't insure drug users. You may not like it but that's simply the way it works
You couldn't. And I don't even care if they're an addict. If they smoke meth daily or drink twelve beers when they get home, so what? As long as they can do their job, fine. I worked with a major alcoholic. He was an asshole, but he got his job done and did it well. So apart from it being unpleasant to work with him, who cares? And if it was cocaine or meth or whatever instead, again, who cares?
You just gave me an idea.
What if insurance were underwritten by a company?
I smell profit.
I'm divided on this one. I think testing is ultimately wrong but I would also like for a way that hr can determine my company won't hire a coke head.
What are your thoughts on this and what would you propose instead?
I would also like for a way that hr can determine my company won't hire a coke head.
If it's not noticeable enough that you need to look at their pee, it's not a big deal. If it is noticeable enough that it affects their work performance, then you don't need to even test for it.
But you’re happy to work with alcoholics, as it’s legal? What is about coke heads you don’t want to work with? What about stoners? Benzo heads?
Shouldn’t we judge people on their work and not their extra curricular activities.
I would hate to be so biased for no reason whatsoever.
Why not judge them based on their work and performance? The employer is entirely free to hire or fire someone for how they perform on the job, especially in at will states.
If someone has a drug problem that impacts their performance, get rid of them.
If someone has a drug addiction that doesn’t impact their work, is it really something their employer needs to police?
Cocaine is a poor example because it is out of most people's urine and blood very quickly. Same with Meth. You probably already work with some people who use, they just know how to hide it and not let it affect their work performance.
These drug tests almost exclusively catch marijuana users. They are also very easy to bypass with synthetic urine, mouthwash, and detox. I used to work at a shop that sold these products and helped people pass drug tests every day.
Hair samples drug tests are the most reliable test method if you really are looking to not hire coke users. Hair samples can show drug use going back many months and even years, so it is way overly intrusive and often catches people who haven't used in a long time. They also make shampoos to help people pass these, but I know they are difficult to use.
My question to you is, Why do you care what someone does drugs if it doesn't affect their work, even harder ones? There are plenty of nice normal people who use drugs that you would never know.
Personally, I just think drug tests are mostly a waste of money and are detrimental to employee rights. I don't think a company should get to tell their employees what they can and can't do in their freetime. The severely addicted people with problems will make themselves known through poor work performance.
Honestly, why does it matter? If they behave inappropriately or don't do their work, that's cause to fire them. Who cares what drugs they may or may not use if it doesn't effect their behavior at work?
Hopefully they get caught in the "is this guy a lunatic" phase of the interview process. If they are functional and otherwise normal and reasonable then who cares if they've got an eight ball in their pocket.
Related story: my ex worked at a vet clinic for a while. She said they hired a new vet tech and he got fired on day one. He'd stolen some animal tranquilizers or something and disappeared. They found him passed out in his car drooling. Called the cops/ambulance and fired him on the spot obviously.
Point is, crazies are easy to spot, who cares what otherwise normal well adjusted people do.
He could've easily been sober and outside the test's sensitivity window. Pass, then still go on to steal horse tranquilizers and get his shit fucked. The test is always an invasion of privacy and only sometimes detect risky persons. Mind you, sometimes it will also give out a false positive and make you refuse a perfectly sober person.
Counterpoint:
A company should not care whether someone is a cokehead.
They should care whether they're reliable, competent etc.
There's established methods of figuring those things out without a drug test.
In most cases it really has less to do with the companies or HR and more to do with their insurance rates. Remember, the absolute last thing an insurance company wants to do is pay out, so if it can find an out or a way to increase the premiums, it will. I mean, sure there might be some uptight HR or other upper level suit with a stick up their ass at some companies, but everything usually has to do with money.
Oh but you forgot the insanely awesome benefit of being able to quit for any reason at any time, as if that wasn't already your unalienable right as a human being!
You have the right to work or starve to death if you want!
With new capitalism plus subscription, you can also pick who your Master is!
"You can quit anytime!"
What sane people hear: "This is the most basic, barebones aspect of no longer living in a feudal society, or at least trying not to."
What market fetishists hear: "This is the peak of workers' rights, and they should be grateful for being allowed such a privilege!"
Yeah first time I heard this nonsense was with my current job at the new-hire interview. I live in an "at-will' state. The HR lady was like "we can fire you at any time for any reason, but the plus side of that is you can quit at any time for any reason."
Uhh.. the "plus side" is something everyone can do anyways. If you don't want to work somewhere you stop working there. They can't force you to get out of bed, drive in, and dedicate 8 hours of your life. That's not a "plus side." It's reality.
The plus side is that instead of being a literal slave, you get to be a wage slave instead
Yeah it's really unfortunate and messed up that that is literally the only recourse the workers have. And usually it's out of the frying pan right into the fire because all companies fucking suck. Corporate culture is so toxic.
Literally had a conversation with my manager about traveling to Chicago. Weed is legal there and he felt it important to remind me that the company has random drug tests. I told him we operate in Denver and sell THC gummies. He told me HR recently told him that we have a 0 tolerance policy that they're looking to ramp up.
We also have trouble hiring because people fail the drug tests..
wait I need to make sure I got this
Your business is selling THC gummies, and the company has a zero tolerance policy.
wow
I get a good laugh any time someone tells me corporations put efficiency above all.
My old grocery store started selling CBD products, and told all of us employees that any employee found USING said CBD products would be dealt with as if they were using marijuana.
Smoke up! Fuck them waste their money on tests and just fail it. Then they can do all the work themselves
Wait, you work for a company that sells THC products but the employees are not allowed to use it on their own time?
ooohhh THAT'S what they meant!
I thought they were talking about a company testing new drugs, and couldn't figure out what the problem was.
I recently found out that after 55 you can withdraw from your 401K without penalties if you lose your job.
It has (I recently turned 55) given me a peace of mind I have never known before. If I get fired, I know it will not be the end of my world, and have my wife’s health insurance to fall back on.
Crazy how we live so many years with this specter of doom hanging over us.
It is so important that we revitalize labor organization and practice mutual aid.
No one may survive alone, and no one should be alone.
Only by taking the workplace and reclaiming the commons may we escape the isolation and precarity forced on us by the systems that tower over us.
You're 55 and just learned what a 401k is? And you've apparently been contributing to it for some amount of time.. so what did you think it was?
Getting downvoted here but.. this dumbass was paying into his 401k for decades and just found out what it was. Sorry but that's just objectively stupid. I'm not even advocating for 401ks, I think they're privatizing something the government should cover. But what absolute idiot pays for something without understanding it?? Did he not have Google? Did he ignore the endless pieces of mail, the HR meetings, the benefits packets?
"2% of my paycheck? Yeah go ahead and take that!"
Apparently American companies do. My wife works in HR for a US company in Canada and has to continuously tell US management that they can't do random drug tests in Canada outside of safety critical roles.
It always is! Then they'll backtrack and try to claim it's actually a better system when it gets pointed out most other equivalent countries don't have such problems.
