• 🇳🇿 🇲🇲 🇯🇵 🇨🇳 🇦🇺 🇦🇶 🇮🇳
    Australian & Asian
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • AADD Moderators: swilow | Vagabond696

NEWS: The Age: Workers face workplace drugs tests (Victoria)

S

SeveredPsyche

Bluelighter
Joined
Nov 5, 2001
Messages
329
Found this article from The Age slightly amusing. Pick the right (or wrong) industry for testing and you could lose half the work force.
Workers face workplace drugs tests
Victorian workers reportedly face on-the-spot drug and alcohol tests under an employer crackdown on workplace safety.
Tests for cocaine, amphetamines and marijuana are initially proposed for the transport and construction industries, the Herald Sun said today.
According to the paper, one of the state's leading transport companies, Linfox, is about to introduce testing for its 5,000 staff around Australia, and another - Toll - is considering the tests.
Random testing, post-accident tests and pre-employment examinations are proposed.
Transport Workers Union state secretary Bill Noonan said drug testing would be standard policy throughout the industry within three years with up to 25,000 workers facing tests.
"It's inevitable," Mr Noonan told the paper.
"In three years' time it will be par for the course."
The Master Builders Association of Victoria said its plans to drug test construction workers could be in place within a year.
"I think we would be aiming for agreement with employees on something like that in the next 12 months," industrial relations and occupational health and safety officer Lawrie Cross told the paper.
It is a good idea for some, especially transport, but does that mean instant dismissal? Some US medications (e.g. on Marinol) warn about using machinery or driving a car and that the patient shouldn't drive unless they prove they are able to cope with the drug (???). The seems kind of bizarre, but I've heard the same argument for driving on illegal drugs (which I don't agree with either). Should a bus driver lose his job because he smoked pot on the weekend? If so, is it because he has comitted a crime, or because his judgement would be impaired?
Click to expand...
 
It's a good idea. It should apply to anyone has to sign on to a mechanical maintenance Access Permit, high/low voltage electrical A.P. and confined space A.P. too.
Authorised recipients are not allowed to be under the influence of drugs (of course), but no testing actually ever done unless an incident occurs. Which only helps determine who was responsible.
But to what extent they are punished is the issue. Slap on the wrist for alcohol and prison for amphetamines?
RL.
 
well all just to let you know that some places, lets say a certain child care centre were some one like me once worked as a gardener/handyman(nothing to do with the care of the littles)had such a test in place.This some one like me went off to an earthcore for a weekend and on the monday avo. was called to give a sample at the gp (there and than)gp was next door.
3 days later was sacked for passing the test with flying colours.tests showd possitive resolts of MDMA and MDA.
So as some one like me said to the Dr. and the scrag mole who owned the centre "well at least i know im getting what i paid for from my dealer"
SOME ONE LIKE ME NOW HAS ONE OF THE BEST JOBS IN THE WORD.
 
I think the issue here isn't whether they're going to test workers for drugs, it's whether they'll acknowledge the fact that the effects of drugs last for a shorter time than the drugs are in your system. Because drugs are illegal it's highly likely that it'll be a blanket ban "test positive and you're out" type thing... but should a worker be made to suffer for testing positive for traces of amphetamines on the Monday after a party on Saturday?
I'm all for drug tests, as long as they're testing for impairment like the alcohol tests are rather than the way drug tests tend to be now. Because as it is it's like saying that you can't drive for 36 hours after a beer...
 
but should a worker be made to suffer for testing positive for traces of amphetamines on the Monday after a party on Saturday?
I guess an arguement from employers is they just don't want their workers engaging in any known illegal activity, no matter how trivial it seems to us. Theres still a lot prejudice of when it comes to drugs and the use of them.
Click to expand...
 
Pleo: I could conceivably go to a party Sunday afternoon, drink a bottle and a half of tequila and twelve beers before 11pm, fall unconscious some time about midnight.
I get up the next morning for whatever (be it work, or otherwise) feeling decidedly seedy, and probably still a bit pissed, but by lunchtime feel able to function properly albeit perhaps a little tired. However, if I drive a car then, I can almost guarantee that I'll be over 0.05% BAC, and therefore lose my license. I may not feel impaired but that does not mean I'm not under the influence and not necessarily operating at 100% normal speed/reflexes/brainpower.
Also another thing to consider could be that regardless of metabolite content in someone's system following their use of drugs, other factors often contribute to physical impairment that go hand-in-hand with drugs. Examples such as sleep deprivation for days at a time, and difficulty assimilating powerful psychedelic experiences into ones lifestyle (like when you're 'wow' for a couple of days after a massive trip session) are only two of the mental effects related to drug use.
BigTrancer :)
 
True, but with illicits this can be much later than the day after - marijuana is a good example... is it fair to be sacked for having a few cones 3 days prior?
 
just in reply, i did use the argument that some one like me was still able to do their work but hay i think that,that someone like me was kind of glad to b out of there anyway, please correct me if im wrong but the Gp did tell that some one like me that party drugs (e,speed and the like )r in the body for around 3-4 days but if you smoke a fair bit it can b detected for months (up to and over 6)even if you stop.
P.s. you can get masking stuff from the US where drug testing is a part of every day life.
 
Erowid's Drug Testing Information Page
Yes, some drugs are detectable in the body for longer than others. THC is the main problem child as its major metabolite can remain detectable for longer than 12 weeks due to 9-carboxy-11-nor-delta-9-THC binding to fat cells in the body.
Cleansing products tend to work on the principle of dilution and are usually as effective as drinking tap water... they really are a waste of money, and will not get you a clear result if you're a habitual smoker who has had a test sprung upon them with less than a week or two notice. Adding a small amount (10%) of visine liquid to a urine sample may have the effect of reducing the detectable urine 9-carboxy-THC level by two-thirds, but tampering with your own urine sample is likely to be an offence. So, you're damned if you do, damned if you don't.
Your only sure saviour is abstinence, unfortunately. Or choose to use drugs that have a very short elimination half-life.
BigTrancer :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top