Drug Testing in the Workplace

How many people have had an interview for a job, received a call that they were hired, and then heard their future employer say that they will have to do a drug test before they can start this new job? “Although many people think that illegal drugs such as marijuana, heroin, cocaine and other street drugs became a problem for youth in the 1960’s the truth of the matter is that there has always been a drug problem in the United States when it comes to substance abuse”(testcountry.org). This past summer I had an interview at Russel Stover Candies, when they called to tell me that the position was mine, they then informed me that I would have to pass a drug test before I could officially have the job. Although some jobs and people believe that drug testing in the workplace should take place, many people do not believe in drug testing. Opponents of WDT (Workplace drug testing) argue that the process of drug testing amounts to an unwarranted invasion of a person’s private life and their body. Some people believe that the statement “free consent” is impossible to obtain. Drug testing did not come into play in the United States until the late 1980’s as a part of the Reagan administration. Before that, there was no standard way for jobs, schools, and even sports to drug test employees, students, or athletes. People that had jobs working with heavy machinery or people that worked in the Department of Transportation were mainly the ones getting drug tested. The issues with drug

D. quality control tests done onsite provide a higher degree of quality control than precast concrete

New Jersey statute N.J.A.C. 6A:16-4.4 raises a host of legal and financial issues for school district administrators. According to the law, when it comes to random testing of student alcohol and other drug use, districts that decide to do random drug tests must follow certain protocols to ensure students’ 4th Amendment rights are not violated.

The issue of drug testing in the workplace has sparked an ongoing debate among management. There are many who feel that it is essential to prevent risks to the greater public caused by substance abuse while on the job. However, others believe that the costs far outweigh the benefits and that it is an invasion of privacy. Putting all ethical issues aside, evidence presented in this paper supports the latter. The costs of drug testing are excessive and only a small percentage of employees are actually found to be substance users. Drug testing in the work place has a negative effect on productivity; contrary to what was originally intended. It actually decreases productivity

Drug testing in the workplace has become a controversial issue, with many believing that the act of drug testing employees is an invasion of privacy and an infringement upon rights. As more and more states legalize Marijuana there is debate whether employees can still be fired for having this “drug” in their system even though the state government, not federal, has allowed the recreational use of the drug. The “War on Drugs” significantly impacted the way employers, and employees alike perceived drug abuse and created a strong push for law enforcement to crack down on drug users. Troops returning from the Vietnam War who used Heroin also had a large impact on the drug testing protocols we see today. This paper will examine the history of drug testing, explore how testing is affected by legalized Marijuana, explore both the affirmation and the opposition to drug testing in the workplace, and conclude with recommendations for possible changes.

Should drug testing be mandatory in the workplace? Many factors, including safety, productivity and reducing the number of employees who use drugs, enhance companies to do mandatory drug testing. On the other hand, many employees feel that drug tests are unfair, an invasion of privacy, and a violation of rights. Suppose an airline company had two pilots standing by their planes. The agency told the travelers that both pilots were flying the same route and that they could choose either plane. One pilot held a sign that said, “I am drug free”. The other pilot’s sign said, “I’m high on cocaine”. Which plane do you think most people would choose? Drug testing should be mandatory in the workplace.

(Sample Drug Free Workplace Policy, 2006). If the employee fails to tell the company about the conviction and the company finds out at a later date, the employee will be terminated immediately with no opportunity to receive drug or alcohol rehabilitation."

The benefits of a properly planned workplace drug testing program outweigh the risks. The main risk is violating the law. There are legal issues connected with workplace drug testing and employers who decide to test must follow applicable state and or local laws. Before go on with a program, it is imperative that you understand the history of drug testing and be aware of the current legal, medical, and risk landscape. Claims an employer could face include unlawful treatment, capture of privacy, or violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act. A comprehensive, well-thought-out workforce drug testing program which addresses who should be tested and when is essential to protecting the company. Researching and implementing a workplace drug

Literature implies that employee drug use in the workplace may create high costs to firms in the form of lower productivity, increased absences, and an increase in workplace accidents. As a response to these costs, employers have implemented a variety of policies and programs to decrease employee drug use. Educational programs and standards such as “Zero Tolerance” policies, employers have turned to drug testing programs more in the past decades. About 46 percent of American workers report that their employer conducts drug testing, although other sources indicate that 90 percent of Fortune 200 companies use some type of drug testing (Flynn 1999). The factor behind workplace drug

My main opinions about compulsory drug testing in the workplace is that it should be mandatory before an individual is hired for employment. The first positive aspect of drug testing in the workplace is to identify those employers who come to work under the influence putting their co-workers as well as themselves at risk by being involved in a preventable accident. In my opinion this is probably the most important as well because it could potentially save many lives to include the abuser. Secondly, drug testing in the work place can identify those employers who may be addicted and in need of professional help of course the employee may not voluntarily ask for help however, through random testing they are identified and offered the professional

In order to keep organization ethical as it relates to drug testing, the U.S. Supreme Court has approved four methods for drug testing. The organization can request a blood, breath, hair, or urine tests. These tests will not harm the job candidate or employee. The company will send the job candidate or employee to an off-site medical

For my final paper I have decided to choose the topic on the very controversial issue of drug testing for current and prospective employees in the workplace. In the textbook we reviewed the opposing opinions of authors Joseph Desjardins and his co-author Ronald Duska and Michael Cranford. The main issue between these writers is whether drug testing invades an individual’s privacy and in what circumstances should drug testing be permissible. I will first review both Desjardins and Cranford’s views on the issue then offer my evaluation.

The purpose of this memorandum is, adopting a policy regarding illegal drug use in the workplace. Employees who engage in the illegal use of drugs risk their safety, that of their colleagues and customers. As part of the company’s responsibilities, you should commit to maintaining a healthy and happy workforce. The policy will provide a formal process to aid employees in dealing with substances that can negatively impact or impede with work performance. Therefore, it should be policy to pre-employment testing and for cause.

The U.S Supreme Court has ruled that drug testing programs are permissible within the public and the private sectors in the job industry. It is said that mandatory drug testing is a permanent fi of American Corporations. By some estimates one-third of American corporations now require their employees to be tested for drug use. These requirements are compatible with general employment law while promoting the public's interest in fighting drug use. Mandatory drug testing is also underwritten by potent political considerations. The public is concerned about the growing use of illegal drugs. The Supreme Court specifically noted this concern in upholding the mandatory testing of Customs Service employees. The use of illegal narcotics, they said, is "one of the greatest problems affecting the health and welfare of our population." (National Treasury Employees Union v. von Rabb 109 S.Ct. 1384, 1989). The public wants drug use stopped; and they are willing to use virtually any means to

CEO, the cause of your problem is not that your employee's take drugs, the problem is that they cost money when they make mistakes. Workman's compensation is what is killing our profit line and we need to manage that problem. Mistakes are the issue in this problem.