and no one irl even has the decency to agree with me because it’s so fucking drilled into the culture that these fucking BuNsInNesSes have a Right to do this because it’s a bSUsniEss. like oh yeah they have an office building so they definitely get to analyze my piss because they say they want to. sick fucking freaks.
preaching to the choir a bit on lemmy (or i would hope so at least) but still
It really depends on the position and what they’re testing for. Do you really want a heavy machinery operator to be a cokehead or heroin addict? There is a real risk of them killing someone. Testing someone in a job like IT for smoking weed? That’s a different story.
Also a lot of the time they only test you post-hiring if you fucked up somehow.
It can definitely be used against people (usually the disenfranchised) though to prevent them being hired or to get them fired.
I said this elsewhere in the thread- unless you are also giving random breathalyzers, this is a ridiculous and hypocritical policy because lots of people drink before going to work. And they’d be drunk right then and there, not at some unspecified point before the test was taken.
deleted by creator
I work in IT and about half the workforce smokes weed. I worked at a high frequency stock trading firm in NYC that made hundreds of millions of dollars per year and tons of the developers were high during work hours. We had quarterly open bar parties where the CEO himself would openly smoke weed.
Being high on THC doesn’t have the same effect on someone that is drunk, all coked up, or doped up on opiates. Smoking weed tends to open up people’s creative sides and it reduces stress and anxiety when something isn’t working the way you want it to. The same can’t be said for the others because they impair your ability to focus, your vision, and decision making.
Also as someone else said, there are only a few positions where being high as hell can seriously impact the company. Most of the time the stuff you do doesn’t have that much of an impact on the company in general.
Wow you are exactly what he is complaining about. It’s not like the guy is coding live and each keystroke goes directly to the machine. What risk is it to people if a couple years ago one of the guys typing keys that would later get tested like crazy was high?
I mean, there are applications where that could be the case. I program PLC’s for a living. Sometimes on live machines running in a plant.
I don’t agree with his overall viewpoint, but he does have a point in this case.
deleted by creator
Bro I knew what safe practices are. But the point being that it is entirely possible.
deleted by creator
Ya if a worker fucking up can directly result in someone dying, I’m not opposed to testing for hard drugs. They also only stay in your system for a few days so if someone can’t pass that, then you can probably find a better fit
The place I work will fire you on the spot if you test positive for marijuana. Marijuana is legal in this state. If I smoke on the weekend, and then test positive on Wednesday, I lose my job.
However, if I get ripple-dee-doo-dah shit-faced Tuesday night, come in on Wednesday miserably hung over, I’ll pass that piss test. And still be more impaired than I would be from that joint I had Saturday night.
As a long time stoner, I agree that we are targeted more than nonusers simply because THC hangs out in the body a lot longer than other drugs. It would take me months to piss clean just so I could get a job at something like Family Dollar. It doesn’t matter if I was a drunk or did an 8 ball of coke a few days ago because that wouldn’t show up in a drug test.
deleted by creator
Yeah but the half life for alcohol is way shorter than weed.
Even worse, alcohol is “zero order kinetics” meaning there is no halving, it gets fully metabolized in a given timespan.
As long as company pays for it and time spent, its okay.
Wonder if drug tests are actual testing on which can shatter one’s mind lol.
You know teachers are never drug tested in the US.
Neither should they be unless there is a suspected problem.
I would have to be high AF to take on that much responsibility for such little pay.
I agree, but some jobs I can see why, like if you’re an air traffic controller, operate heavy machinery, etc. Government jobs and Government contractors ($100k+ contracts) also require them but that’s a government job…
Your job is paying for your health insurance. I’m honestly surprised they don’t test for more. The American health care system is ridiculous.
They gave me a minor physical before I could start work, since it requires some physical strength to perform. They also tested my hearing and vision. However, they are required to give a yearly hearing test by OSHA in order to ensure that hearing protection is adequate for the environment. They don’t test for cannabis, since we live in a legal state. I can understand checking for things like opiates and meth since you could seriously injure or kill someone if you’re not sober.
It’s not paid and the US Supreme Court has ruled that it doesn’t have to be. Why should I perform labor that I am not being compensated for?
You should see how they do it in the service industry. No tests to get the job, but if you’re ever hurt at work and entitled to workman’s comp they give you a test and if you’ve smoked weed anytime in the last month the presumption is that you were high at work and not only do they not have to pay you for your injury but they just flat-out fire you.
Never get between a grift industry and it’s profits.
The worker’s comp drug tests are such a disgusting example of late stage capitalism.
Imagine that you made a lot of money and lived comfortably off of the hard work of others. Then when one of those others got hurt while making money for you, you go out of your way to make sure you don’t have to help them cover the medical costs. Also, you take their only source of income away from them so they couldn’t even cover it themselves if they wanted to.
I can’t imagine being that heartless, and its literally just standard pretty much everywhere in the US. It is very saddening.
This is the intersection of two elements of our culture:
-
everyone must always do everything they can to make as much money as possible regardless of the consequences
-
if someone uses drugs, they’re not a person anymore and it’s okay to hurt them as much as is within your power
-
This sounds like a talking point for the right about the “extreme” left. I don’t own a business but I also don’t expect them to foot the bill if I come to work drunk and it sounds pretty ridiculous to say they should. Saying addicts should get jobs and not worry about the consequences of coming to work under the influence is ridiculous. I’m all for helping people when they’re ready for help but giving them a pass for being reckless is too far.
Saying addicts should get jobs and not worry about the consequences of coming to work under the influence is ridiculous
that’s why no one is saying that. what we’re saying is that smoking weed a month ago shouldn’t cost you your job and your workmen’s comp if you get injured at work, and that this industry has used the drug war as an excuse to manufacture a system where absolutely none of the consequences of drug use are prevented but they can avoid paying people what they owe for forcing them to work long hours in unsafe environments under the guise of a “drug free workplace”.
A high person isn’t anymore dangerous than a sleep deprived person. Should they also be able to deny workman’s comp to someone for not getting enough sleep?
I agree that people shouldn’t go to work high or drunk, for the most part(honestly dont really care, I would judge my hypothetical workers solely on their work performance and behavior), but these tests catch substances used in the person’s freetime. An employer shouldn’t get to decide that just because someone got high in the safety of their home two weeks before being hurt on the job that they aren’t eligible for assistance. It’s pretty messed up.
I guess if they could somehow make a drug test that could test someone’s intoxication levels and tolerance at the exact time of the incident, then maybe it would be fair. Even then, they were hurt while attempting to make you money. I think it’s just the right thing to do, morally, regardless of the employee’s idiocy.
And yea I know, the right thinks any sort of empathetic idea is extreme.
My biggest fear is failing one when I haven’t taken anything. I never have, but I know people who have. I’ve also known people who have passed after getting totally blitzed the night before. They are wildly inaccurate, aside from being an invasion of privacy.
I read, when you eat stuff with poppy seeds, some tests are false positive, because the plants are closely related.
opiates.
Not closely related, Opium is made from the same plant as poppy seeds, the plant is aptly named the opium poppy. (This is the cash crop of afghanistan, which supplies 80% of the worlds opiate demand as of 2021, down from 90% in 2011, but currently in the rise again.) Old info see comment below
The seeds dont have opiates in them, but the fluid in the seed pod (or something like that) does so the seeds are typically contaminated with opiates.
https://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan/Opium_cultivation_Afghanistan_2022.pdf
That info is outdated; the Taliban have heavily cracked down on opium cultivation to the extent that their total crop yield saw a “95% decline from 6,200 tons produced in 2022 to 333 tons in 2023”.
https://www.unodc.org/documents/crop-monitoring/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_opium_survey_2023.pdf
I did not know that, thank you for the link. That graph of production looks like my stock portfolio lol.
I remember in the 2000s reading that production soared after we invaded and kicked the taliban back. Wonder how this will impact the heroin epidemic.
It’s an interesting question! My understanding is that it may affect opiates like heroin, but not opioids (fentanyl, oxycodone, novacaine etc) as opiates are naturally derived whereas opioids are synthetic.
This opinion piece from Chatham House says before 2023, Afghanistan was responsible for over 80% of global opium supply, so I’d say the impact on the heroin market will be significant to say the least.
In my armchair opinion, I think we’re likely to see opioids like fentanyl fill that gap. That scares me a lot given the relative strengths at identical concentrations of heroin and fentanyl vary so wildly.
It’s especially frustrating as someone who needs cannabis for severe anxiety, because it’s anxiety inducing in itself to have to hide it and that pretty much cancels out the benefits for me- it’s something we absolutely need to destigmatize at work especially.
Please try therapy. Anxiety is curable with therapy, whereas meds or cannabis are temporary symptom relief, but the symptoms will always come back as soon as you’re sober.
Lmfao. Anxiety is curable with therapy is not a rule. Some anxiety is curable with therapy, but not all of it.
For example?
I have Generalized anxiety disorder, It’s chronic and therapy doesn’t “cure” it. I will most likely struggle with it for the rest of my life. While this may be an anecdotal example I’m not aware of anything that “cures” anxiety disorders, therapy is mostly there to manage the symptoms effectively. Therapy helped me understand and somewhat mitigate the problem, but it’s not something I can ever be rid of, and that’s how it is for a lot of people who have an anxiety disorder.
And just like that, the entire American medical system, as well as kittnpunk’s mental health, began to heal!
Psychotherapy is the single most evidence-based treatment for anxiety, the literature stands up across the world. Not sure why you’re bringing the American medical system into this, but while we’re on the topic, our medical system absolutely encourages people to seek solutions in substances. Kittnpunk is saying they’re so anxious that they cannot function without being high. Psychotherapy can 100% help them decrease their reliance on cannabis to feel less anxious
America is a sick joke
The world is a sick joke
And our broken humanity is to blame.
Not an American exclusive
The main thing is, as long as you don’t show up to work blitzed I don’t see how anyone should give a shit. Whatever you do at home is your business, provided you leave it at home.
That’s the policy at my business. IDGAF if you spend all of your off hours at the bottom of a bottle or on top of cloud nine, just don’t bring it to work.
Additional problems include: If there is a workplace accident and someone gets injured, both OSHA and insurance companies immediately come knocking to try to do drug tests on everyone involved purely as an attempt to shift blame and deny claims. We don’t have any heavy equipment here or anything so I’m not too worried about that, but there are businesses in America that would get fucked in a situation like that so they’re kind of forced to enact drug bans even if management doesn’t want to on a personal level.
If you’re driving a bus I don’t want you even “buzzed” in the slightest
Which is a problem that pre-employment drug testing does not correct in any way, shape or form.
Pre employment and post accident seems completely fine.
- “Reasonable suspicion” if someone seems altered.
I’ll agree randoms are dumb and invasive.
Post accident is fine because the question there is “were you actively impaired while working” which is a valid concern. What is pre-employment testing supposed to show that’s relevant to the vast majority of jobs though? “Sometimes this person uses recreational drugs.” Ok, and what? Are they coming to work impaired? If not, then outside of the medical field and airline pilots, who cares?
Why on earth should a corporation be allowed to require a privacy violating urine test as a condition for employment for a desk job? And even for safety critical jobs like medical or pilots, a pre-employment urine test isn’t going to catch abuse of the one drug that is the biggest red flag in the entire collection: alcohol.
Many hyper critical jobs have drug screens every time you enter the job site
That’s not relevant to pre-employment testing being literally useless for the vast majority of jobs
Why not? Can’t be sober and clean for day 1 after getting an offer?
Sure, it doesn’t matter what I do on their time. But, if my time starts affecting company time, then it becomes a problem. It’d be a pretty bad look if I showed up to work wasted.
As drug use is nomalizing, I can understand that companies normalize drug tests, too. Even as a normal person I prefer jobs that require a certain level of precision or which could be dangerous when mistakes are made to be performed by people who are neither drunk nor high.
Same. I was a cook in a casino restaurant (bear with me), and when I applied for the job the head chef asked me “can you pass a drug test?” I said “oh yeah, I don’t do any dr-”, he interrupts me to say “I didn’t ask if you do any drugs, I asked if you can pass a drug test. Yes or no?”
Well, turns out 2 line cooks had heroin problems, the head chef, sous chef, and morning lead chef were functioning alcoholics, one general manager was coked out of his fucking mind 24/7 until the last few days before payday, the other was taking about 3x as much xanax as anyone should, and the wait staff smoked approximately as much as Snoop Dogg.
Needless to say, that place was the definition of a runaway clusterfuck. Much of their problems were caused by the rampant drug use amongst the employees that could have been prevented if they were a little more thorough with the drug tests, rather than literally giving me the pee cup to take home and bring back later.
Welcome to the service industry. The dish washer usually has the best hook up.
Oh no, that was my first kitchen job, I’ve since quit the industry after 10 years in the kitchen
Everyone out here pretending like this scenario isn’t a problem.
Apparently casino management is fine with a shit show kitchen.
Was the food good?
They didn’t care, we were often reminded that our job is not to make good food or even make profit on food sales, it was only to keep people in the casino. If customers leave to grab some food elsewhere they’re unlikely to come back and gamble more, but if they eat in the casino they usually do gamble more.
It’s a big part of the reason why casinos give out meal comps if people have just lost a lot of money, because that’s when most tend to just go home. But give them free food, and they feel more content after a little break from the slots and a full belly, and they’re much more likely to sit back down for “just a few more spins” on their way to the exit. So casinos exploit that to squeeze even more money out of problem gamblers, their biggest cash-cows. Disgusting tactics, truly despicable.
But anyway, some cooks were dedicated and made great food regardless, most of the head chef’s and sous chef’s responsibilities were dumped onto them for no extra pay. Too much pride and loyalty for their own good. But I’d say like half of the kitchen staff on any given day were either nodding off high as shit in the smoking area (or even behind the line, open kitchen btw), buying drugs or selling stolen meat in the parking lot, jacking off in the bathroom, or shooting up/passed the fuck out on the dirty mattress that someone had dragged into an empty shipping container out back.
That said, it was the “high-end” restaurant in the casino.
selling stolen meat in the parking lot, jacking off in the bathroom, or shooting up/passed the fuck out on the dirty mattress
Fuck that’s heaven
I don’t see how that follows. The point is a drug test is a personal invasion so there needs to be a good reason. Operating heavy machinery is a good reason. Where lives are at stake is a good reason. Where it can have an outsized financial or other impact may be a good reason.
However, for most people, I don’t see why it’s not just a matter of good job performance or not. Sure, companies may want to drug test everyone to keep them in line, but that’s not sufficient reason
That implies that drug use in general would severly negatively impact your work performance.
And thats simply not the case. John smoking a joint before dinner and partying on MDMA one Saturday in a month, will not make him a worse employee than Jim, who takes no illegalized drugs, but is consistently sleep deprived and over caffeinated.
Drug tests don’t test for current intoxication. They test for drug consumption in the past few days, or in the case of weed, past few weeks. So even for heavy machinery or other typical cases where current intoxication is not acceptable, they test for the wrong thing. Finally it is extremely inconsistent. If you have a opiod prescription, you are allowed to drive cars, while the medication is working if the impairment isn’t too strong . But it impairs you in the same way like recreational opiod use would. So the same impairment is perfectly acceptable in one case, and a reason for losing your licencse and possible criminal charges in the other.
deleted by creator
You’re right, but also it’s to get cheaper business insurance. Because businesses that don’t test have to pay more to insure themselves. If you own a business, you have to buy insurance for the business to ensure that if your business gets sued, it’s the business that takes the hit, not you personally.
Ding ding ding.
Everything boils down to cost and money eventually
I am so glad my new job doesn’t test unless if there is an industrial accident or in very specific dangerous positions where it is warranted. Handbook basically says don’t show up to work fucked up. What you do on your own time is your business.
It is a huge breach of privacy, especially when you have to start disclosing legally prescribed medications that they test for. Why a company has a right to my body, my medical history, or any other private information is nuts.
The fact that there is a system, run by Equifax of course, where employers can choose to hand your work history, paystubs, and other information to and then other companies can then pay to get access to is also nuts. You can request to have it frozen, but who the hell even knows to do this? It is messed up.
OSHA and Workers Comp require a test to be done if it’s a workplace accident.
Exactly. We do industrial automation. I did the field life at my last job spending months at construction sites building these giant warehouses with conveyor and automation. New job is more focused on robotics, but plenty of conveyor too. It is a fun field and I highly encourage Software Engineers/Developers/etc to look more into doing Controls Engineering and work in this industry. It sounds boring on paper a lot of the time, but I have never been happier.
I run a manufacturing business; you oversimplify.
Quite coincidentally my HR person came to me just an hour ago and told me that two people have complained of a coworker smoking on breaks and at lunch and being high on the job.
He drives a heavy forklift. Am I to ignore the situation? If I do I expose my employees to danger and my small business to lawsuits.
How are the employees that reported it supposed to react if I say “Whatever, that’s his business.”
To a large extent businesses have their hands tied by the rules and laws of society.
Many of the drug tests don’t check for drugs currently in your system. Many of them are akin to checking your liver levels to see if you’ve had alcohol at all in the past week.
Also, what a massive straw man.
Sure…but it’s not on him. Realistically, there’s:
- The insurance company that has the restriction (required by law)
- Lawmakers that make the law putting anyone under the influence responsible for any accidents, and by extension the company for letting it happen (if they knew)
I wouldn’t necessarily blame this guy, but our elected officials. If anyone’s to blame, it’s mostly Republicans (and Democrats in the early 90s) for pushing these laws so hard.
Okay, see, now this is the sort of nuance that I think is good for the discussion!
But what you are saying is probable cause. I think the OP complains about random testing without any justification.
In your example, even if you were not legally entitled to carry out a drug test, you could simply call the police and let them do the check.
Random tests could be fairer and avoid discrimination or prejudicial testing.
Random tests are used as discriminatory and prejudicial testing.
They are never actually random.
My union pays you $100 if you get hit with a random. They’re also the ones who issue them. Not my employer
This is kinda nice
That’s a very easily solvable problem
Unless your idea is to use a daily meeting where a d100 is rolled ro determines who is tested today in front of everyone you cannot really rule out any suspicion for bias.
You just came up with a single super simple way to do it. I’m sure there’s loads of other solutions that offer similar sort of randomness with more convenience.
And remember, we’re comparing this to people asking to be tested on a hunch. Do you not think these randomness measures are better for fighting bias and discrimination, or is the issue that you can’t have 100% always free of bias randomness?
Random drops are how you catch functionals before they fuck up and cost business.
Not really, the person could refuse and the cops can’t do anything unless it’s operated in public which most forklifts are not.
I’ve also worked a lot in heavy industry and if choices were. I’d rather have drug testing at an interval than not, and alcohol blow test every morning.
Narcotics, and alcohol, do not belong in the workplace and I dispise apologists. Then I’m also biased against since I’ve seen too many ruin their lives catching the next high or dying of it. A bit irrelevant to your post but it really rustles my jimmies.
deleted by creator
He’s operating heavy machinery while on drugs? I guarantee you he’s signed employment agreement papers saying he wouldn’t do that. He broke an agreement for employment. He should be out. Best of luck to him and I hope he finds a company you’ve started that accepts folks operating heavy machinery while on drugs. Hope the insurance costs aren’t too high because the employees are ;)
An employer is not a therapist. No small business owner should have to play guidance counselor for their employees.
They are neither the fucking police, and here you are drug testing people
Are there criminal charges following a drug test?
No.
Bad example.
If negative drug tests are a condition for employment, you’ve agreed to them as part of employment. Being let go because you broke a condition for employment is on you.
You are welcome to find jobs where there are no drug tests, or start your own company with that ethos in mind.
I don’t drug test at my business, but if two of my long-term employees come to HR and flat-out tell me that another of their recently-hired coworkers is smoking at breaks and at lunch my hands are legally pretty tied.
I can’t ignore it.
This was more common back in the days, but the issue is that it will result in societal inefficiencies like alcoholics not getting better. Best is nipping it before it gets a lot worse.
This is why in other countries there are a lot of responsibilities as an employer and they need to help with either private or public healthcare.
I’m going to guess that the “other countries” you mentioned also have functional and affordable health care systems?
Yes, my point was that it can be good for society to burden eachother too. Especially where we’re supposed to earn our daily living, look out for people
Give me a functional healthcare system and I’m down with assigning companies more responsibility.
In Sweden the responsibility comes first, the company are liable for the employee if they don’t take action and know about the substance abuse (for example). And I think the US at least had some laws prohibiting like that, but maybe I’m thinking of wrongful termination
deleted by creator
I imagine for the pay.
I appreciate my employers policy - you get one free pass if you attend therapy following a positive drug test. A second positive and you’re out.
We do randomly get tested regularly.
This reads like the world is 100% at fault for your personal problems.
This is a big reason why rational people grow out of the far-left academia: not everything is capitalism’s fault.
deleted by creator
“Rational people grow out of far left academia” - what a provable statement this person said. Certainly doesn’t sound made up in the moment they were writing the comment.
You’re being so naive. I can’t get involved in the personal lives of all of my employees, nor is it my place. I’m running a business, which from the sound of it you’ve never done. It takes a lot more effort than you seem to think. A lot.
Hell, in some ways it’s not even legal for me to ask about an employee’s personal life.
I treat my employees well. I have a chef on staff and they get a free lunch every day in a cafeteria. I pay competitively. I didn’t lose a single employee through the pandemic and have employees that have been with my company for 10-20 years. It’s a damn good place to work. Not every problem an employee has stems from a shit work environment.
Malignant task-master? Out of touch with reality? I know Leemy is anti-capitalism, but it may surprise you to learn that not every employer is rolling in profits and lighting cigars with 100 dollar bills. I work damn hard and have employees that have a higher take home pay than I do. Every day is a challenge.
They’re operating heavy machinery, not flipping burgers.
