Drug test before employment, but why not during? (employee, sample, CDL) - Jobs, employers, employees, hiring, resumes, occupations, government, laws, unions, contracts, workers, part-time - City-Data Forum

h0tmess · 01-14-2010, 06:50 PM

It seems as if more companies do a drug screening prior to hiring someone. I fully agree and support this. What I don't understand is..why don't they do a follow up? Why don't they have a few random drug tests per year?

In my opinion, it seems as if the person would be clean prior to working at a place because they had no job/money to buy the drugs in the first place.. lol

I see a few people at my job who seem really cracked out or REALLY strung out sometimes. It's not a debate on whether or not drugs are bad--and which ones are OK or not-- it's more or less the fact that it's a place of business. I'd love to go to work drunk off my ass, but I don't simply because... I'm an adult?

In this economy we really should have only the best people working. This would be a great way to trim the fat of the company and hire potentially better employees, IMO.

So, does your company do this? If not, is it possible that a company can do this upon request? At the same time I'd hate to be that guy to start this and be called a "narc".. lol!

What do you think?

NSX · 01-14-2010, 06:55 PM

Hmm...interesting question.

You would think that this "problem" would take care of itself, so I don't think there's anything that you/the company would need to do. If the drugs were negatively affecting the employees' performance, you would think that they would eventually be let go. However, if the drug(s) in question do not affect how well the employee does his or her job, why should management care?

h0tmess · 01-14-2010, 07:01 PM

That's actually a good point. However, let's be honest. If I took a few pills and became a bit loopy/goofy..but still maintained to do my job, no one would ever know.

If I had a few shots of vodka on my lunch break and was also goofy/loopy and was still able to do my job...it wouldn't matter because you would smell the vodka on my breath. Any manager in this situation would say "Well he reeks of booze, but, he's doing his job"

shadowwalker · 01-14-2010, 07:03 PM

Most companies won't do random testing. The only way is if there is a accident or impairment while working type of deal. And with so many racial/gender biased type lawsuits that could be looming if someone is tested and passes or thinks they are being "picked" on.
And then there is the old saying for certain jobs-we mostly just need a warm body that shows up every day...

kodaka · 01-14-2010, 07:14 PM

just because your own employer doesn't continue with random screening after hiring doesn't mean all employers are the same.

And just because you think a person is acting or behaving in an inappropriate way doesn't mean your employer agrees, or that the source of it is illegal drugs.

Anti-depressants, anti-anxiety, and other psychiatric medication, especially overmedication or interactions, can cause a person to behave as if they are under the influence of illegal substances. And of course these people deserve the same medical privacy as the rest of us and do not have to explain the reasons for their behavior to their colleagues such as you.

Charles · 01-14-2010, 07:24 PM

How ironic:

Cocaine found in shuttle work area, NASA says - Space.com- msnbc.com

NSX · 01-14-2010, 07:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadowwalker

Most companies won't do random testing. The only way is if there is a accident or impairment while working type of deal. And with so many racial/gender biased type lawsuits that could be looming if someone is tested and passes or thinks they are being "picked" on.
And then there is the old saying for certain jobs-we mostly just need a warm body that shows up every day...

Great point. If a company did this to an employee who came back with a negative screening, it is basically asking for a harassment lawsuit.

A friend of mine failed a 10-panel test because she was on an anti-anxiety medication, and the testers never bothered to ask her verbally or in writing what prescriptions she was on. Needless to say she was pissed, but ended up getting it straightened out and employed and also apologies from the company. The whole thing has just gotten pretty stupid and out of hand.

JS1 · 01-14-2010, 08:49 PM

One would think that with all the cost-cutting going on these days, unnecessary drug testing would be a luxury to be cut, along with Christmas parties and working fax machines.

brightdoglover · 01-15-2010, 03:50 AM

Testing upfront eliminates those too addled to lay off the stuff before a drug test. The military did this- told me when to come in for a drug test before accepting me. I guess they figured if you couldn't abstain to pass this, they could just count you out.

Robhu · 01-15-2010, 05:06 AM

Most jobs considered to be Public Safey Factor jobs do random drug tests. Jobs like bus drivers, truck drivers, cab drivers, cops, firemen, pilots, or any job that requires a CDL license, etc, etc.
I worked for a company for 30 years and after the work place drug rules were passed I had to have a drug test anually and a DOT physical.
On top of that the company had to put every employees company ID number in the computer and it was set up to randomly pick the required number of people to be tested each month.
You might be tested twice in one month or maybe just get picked once a year. You never knew when the computer would pick your number. It just had to meet a monthly quota of tests performed. This was a full scope drug test done at a hospital with a urine sample.
Then there was the separate alcohol only random tests. This was done on site with a saliva test. The last 7 years I worked there I was in supervision. And shift supervisors had to administer the alcohol tests. You had the person swab their mouth with a Q-tip type thing and then put it in a sealed tube that changed to a certain color for the amount of alcohol present. If the test was positive then the person had to be transported to a local hospital for confirmation. Our test wasn't official. It just showed whether the person had to have further testing to confirm alcohol.
But they did work. I brought a test kit home one night and drank 6 beers then tested myself.
It gave a color reading of 0.14.
Not all companies do random tests. Probably not the mom and pop machine shop or the local convenience store or maybe not even fast food chains or retail stores.
But any company involved with transportation, saftey forces, local, state, or federal government do random tests. It's Federal law.