Drug testing and human rights

[captainsparrow]

Is workplace drug testing a violation of human rights? I feel like what I do in my spare time is no ones business, especially my employers.

I have bought equipment to fake a drug test, cuz I feel so strongly about this.

 

[CFC]

That's a question that's often up for debate, and has been case tested under EU Human Rights legislation (the appellant lost). I largely agree with you, but there are certain occupations where common sense dictates that drug-testing should be mandatory. I would not like to be a passenger on an aircraft with the pilots tripping on LSD, for example.

The TUC has this to say:

Despite claims from drugs-testing companies, there is no real evidence that drug-testing is becoming common-place in British workplaces. It is mainly used, often with union agreement, in safety critical areas such as transport and energy generation or after an incident. There is also increased usage in the construction industry. However generally where wide-scale drug testing has been considered it has been rejected either because of cost, union objections, or doubts over the effectiveness.

There is nevertheless a very aggressive marketing campaign by a number of US-based drugs-testing companies and many union representatives are going to find themselves confronted with proposals for drug testing in the workplace. This briefing seeks to help union representatives to respond to any such proposals.

 

[T. Calderone]

Pre-employment drug testing is becoming more commonplace but this is the world we live in today. What about background/criminal history checks? If you can't pass those, you're really screwed. I understand why they do this but find it intrusive. What line of work are you in?

I'll leave this open for now but keep in mind we don't allow beating drug test discussion, what's detectable, etc.
http://www.bluelight.org/vb/threads/441015-BDD-Guidelines

 

[shartito]

I work for a call center, in management. We used to have mandatory drug testing for ALL new employees.

In October 2016, we stopped drug testing. Since then we have suffered in many areas, including attrition, absenteeism, and quality.

I’m not saying I’m pro-drug test. But there is a reason companies do it. I’ve seen the numbers. Hell, I’ve MADE the numbers. I’ve actually done analysis and made a presentation to execs to bring drug testing back...

Am I a hypocrite? Probably. But I’m doing my job.

Let’s face the truth guys. Addicts and users, as a general rule, don’t make model employees. Are there exceptions to the rule? Sure. But they’re exceptions.

I’m a user, but I’m functional. Somewhat functional at least. Would I be more productive if I wasn’t a user? Absolutely. I can admit that. This is not to say I’m anything special. Far from it. I slipped through the cracks and am very fortunate to still have my job. Luckily hydrocodone helps me perform.

And I’m on the higher end of the spectrum. Let’s talk about the 20-25 year old demographic that my company hires.

There is a marked difference in the caliber of employee that you bring in when you don’t drug test. Especially in call center work where it’s all basically entry level positions anyway. The difference is undeniable. I see it, and the numbers prove it.

And I’m high on opiates as I type this on my phone at my work desk.

Wtf.

EDIT - So, I thought more about this, and I guess it varies what country we're in, and their specific laws. But you have to separate what we would call basic human rights from the law. For example, I think most of us would agree that slavery is against human rights, but yet it was legal in the US, and many other countries. I believe it still may be legal in some. So, "human rights" is a theory, an intangible idea that most of us have feelings about, and a lot of it is influenced by our upbringing and values. But our idea of "human rights" doesn't always play out in the real world.

Drug testing, while some may think it goes against human rights... it really doesn't matter. If companies are allowed to do it, they will if they want to. Irregardless of whether it infringes on human rights.

And I agree with the above poster, who used the pilots on acid example. What about a forklift operator? A crane operator? An electrician? A plumber? A teacher? All of those professions have inherent danger if done under the influence of drugs. And while it's a romanticized idea to think that people can separate work from their personal life, anyone who has been through addiction (or spent any time on these forums) knows that our personal lives (especially drug use) carries into our work lives the longer we use drugs.

Now should drug users be able to get jobs to better themselves and climb out of a lifestyle they want to leave? Abso-fucking-lutely. That's the Catch 22. There's no easy answer to this question.

Anyway, I'm rambling now. Sorry for the wall of text. This is a good conversation. I'm not sure where I lay exactly... But being in the position where I've done analysis on precisely this topic... there is no room for argument. Drug testing (or lack thereof) has a HUGE impact on the caliber of employees hired.

 

[captainsparrow]

What if they only failed you on a drug test if you were high on duty? I feel like if you only get high on your off hours, and are always sober on the job, there is no issue. Just sucks that some of these drugs stay in your system for so long.

 

[Keif' Richards]

Closing this one.

It's not legal for someone to come knock on your door and demand your piss. If you agree to work for a private employer in exchange for money, you're doing so under the predication that you are going to follow various rules and expectations set out by that employer. If they want to drug test you as part of their hiring process, they can do that. They can make you stand on one foot and recite the pledge of allegiance if that's what they want.

It sucks, but that's the breaks. Closure, due to drug testing content...