RE: In Reference to Drug Testing

[Janet Valade <janetv -at- systech -dot- com>]

	ve read through all the responses to the OTHER test, and I still
can't
	determine why people are so opposed to initial drug testing.

	There are two objections: 1) a matter of principle and 2) pragmatic.

	1. principle: Citizens of the US have rights that are protected by
law. One right is that no one, not even law enforcement, can conduct a
search without probable cause, based on evidence, to believe that you are
engaged in an illegal activity. I don't believe that employers should have
more rights than law enforcement. I don't believe the fact that it would be
cheaper for the employer is a good justification to violate my rights. I
suspect it would be cheaper for law enforcement to ignore my rights as well.
I think it would probably be good for the employer  to conduct a complete
search of my house before hiring me. They could find out if I have drugs
there (before the drug testing technology became available, that was the
only way an employer could have found out about an employee's drug use), how
much alcohol I have in the house, whether I am organized and industrious or
slovenly. They could find out about my recreational activities and probably
my sex life. They could read my correspondence with my creditors to see how
reliable I am finanacially. They could read my correspondence with my mother
and probably find out lots of things I don't want them to know. However, I
am not likely to give permission for a search of my house. Or a search of my
car. Or a body cavity search. So, why would I give permission for a search
of my bloodstream? It has nothing to do with my beliefs regarding drug use;
it has totally to do with my beliefs regarding eroding civil rights.

	It's really a "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance" issue.

	2. pragmatic: Drug testing is a long way from %100 accurate. False
positives are not that rare. A false positive can cause you immense
problems. If you are taking a medication that you believe might cause you to
test positive for drugs, you are forced to tell them about legal drugs you
are taking, information that they also have no right to request. Perhaps you
didn't want them to know that you need massive doses of valium every day:-)
Even if you have the opportunity to explain the result with this employer,
that result is out there, in writing and in a database, and might end up
surfacing in another context in which you had no opportunity to explain the
result. You will never know why you didn't get that security clearance you
applied for. Or why the insurance company raised the rates on your health
insurance. 

	I have personal experience working with employees who openly used
drugs.
	They wasted a lot of time at work and a lot of my time, because I
had to
	verify what they were doing all of the time to make sure it was done
	correctly (or done at all).

	However, the problem for the employer was not their drug use. It was
their time wasting. So, the employer needed to screen them with a test for
time wasting. And you can certainly fire them for time wasting; you don't
need some drug test result to fire them. 

	Janet

Janet Valade
Technical Writer
Systech Corporation, San Diego, CA
mailto:janetv -at- systech -dot- com




^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Learn how to develop HTML-based Help with Macromedia Dreamweaver!
Dec. 7-8, 2000, Orlando, FL -- $100 discount for STC members.
http://www.weisner.com/training/dreamweaver_help.htm or 800-646-9989.

Your web site localized into 32 languages? Maybe not now, but sooner than 
you think. Download ForeignExchange's FREE paper, "3 steps to successful 
translation management" at http://www.fxtrans.com/3steps.html?tw.

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit 
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.