Drug testing has become a mandatory task in nearly every workplace, no employer would like to employ personnel with unacceptable habits of drug addiction. Employee drug testing is not about catching employees using drugs, it’s about preventing the use of drugs at the work place in order to maintain a healthy environment. Drug testing is a moral obligation and responsibility to keep the workplace safe for all the employees, customers and other related personnel.
Common reasons employers implement drug testing is to-
• Deter employees from abusing alcohol and drugs
• Prevent hiring individuals who use illegal drugs
• Be able to identify early and appropriately refer employees who have drug and/or alcohol problems
• Provide a safe workplace
…show more content…
One of the most prevalent method being Saliva Drug Test. Saliva provides a non-invasive and quick specimen for drug testing. A Saliva Drug Test ranges from detection of alcohol to cannabis, HIV antibodies to steroids. Saliva Drug Test enables a screening in a very short detection time period. They are designed to tell if someone has recently used a drug. There is no need for a specific place or a laboratory for conducting this test as it can be done with a small Saliva Drug …show more content…
Saliva drug test provides you with results in not more than 10minutes of a simple and easy to handle procedure. The days are gone when employers had to wait for few days before employing someone, reason solely being a result of drug test. For a Saliva Drug test one does not require a big lab for testing or heavy equipment, which makes it less cost incurring test as it can be conducted right at the job place. Despite being inexpensive the results of test are extremely accurate. Plus, the test is not only confined to alcohol testing, but also leads to detection of cocaine, opiates, methamphetamines, benzodiazepines, oxycodone and many more. Medical professionals have claimed that SDT is advantageous as it can reveal whether or not you have smoked, snorted or ingested an illegal substance up to 72hours prior to the
In order to qualify for assistance, people must be: working for low wages or working part-time, unemployed, receiving welfare or other public assistance payments, elderly, homeless, or disabled with low-income (para 3). “The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) sets the rules for SNAP, but individual states run the program. The USDA also provides all the funding for the actual food benefits, while states are responsible for about half the cost of running the program,” (Cancio para 3). Since the state and the federal governments are paying for this program, people should be screened for drugs to prove they are not breaking the federal law about drug use. Illegal drug use is becoming a big issue in today’s society, therefore, most employers have started drug testing before
FACTS Elk Valley Coal Corporation is a mining industry involving high risk worksites. In order to uphold an environment with effective health and safety standards, employers ask that all operators disclose any issues regarding addiction so that incidents can be avoided. If said dependencies were brought to the attention of the employer, further treatment would be provided. Notwithstanding, employees who failed to come forward and were later involved in a work related incident with positive drug tests would be excused from the job.
In present-day scenario hair has become a vital biological sample, substitute to the usual samples blood and urine which are found at the crime scene, for drug testing in the different fields like forensic toxicology, clinical toxicology and clinical chemistry. Furthermore, hair-testing is now extensively used in workplace testing and at legal cases, historical research etc. Hair structure and the mechanisms of drug incorporation into it are discussed. The usual training and withdrawal methods as well as the analytical techniques of hair samples are offered. The conclusions of hair analysis have been reviewed for the following categories: drugs of abuse (opiates, cocaine and related, amphetamines, cannabinoids), benzodiazepines, official drugs, pesticides and biological pollutants, doping agents and other drugs or substances.
Working individuals are required to perform these drug tests in order to maintain employee standards for their given company (Besonen). Professional sports teams, the military, and many other institutions enforce drug testing to their employees (Besonen). In theory welfare recipients are basically employees of the state government in terms that they receive their funds, so the standards have reasonable regards to back them up
The United States economy is in trouble and the economy statewide is not doing any better. In rough times like these those elected into public office are put under extreme pressure to try and alleviate the problems. Different people have different ideas of ways to fix the economy, and drug testing before receiving welfare is one of them that is still not agreed upon. Welfare drug testing has been a highly debated topic in the U.S. for quite some time now. There are plenty of opinions that agree and disagree with the drug tests, but real statistics uncover the hard truth about the success of welfare drug testing.
It may seem a little invasive, but schools are permitted to use drug dogs to sniff out contraband during unannounced, random searches and it becomes a controversial problem for all. The use of drug-sniffing dogs in schools is permitted because students do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in the school and school search did not go against the Fourth Amendment, which is the right of people to be secure in their personal spaces houses and papers. While drug dogs are becoming more and more commonplace in our public schools and to maintaining a drug-dog program can cost district estimates $12,000 and $36,000 every year. Drug dog must go through a long period of time of training and drug dogs are not dangerous to people, but instead it protects people. Without reservation, we must know the history background, advantages, and disadvantages of having a drug dog searches.
Yes, I believe that it is necessary for police officers to be randomly drug tested. The duty that a police officer has is to protect and serve the city or town. If they are abusing drugs the officers cannot perform their duty to its fullest potential. More important though drug testing is important for the safety of civilians. If an officer is abusing drugs they could end up hurting civilians, whether getting into an accident on the road or accidentally shooting them thinking that they saw a weapon when there was not one.
A few of those are privacy concerns, cost of testing, issues arising under individual state laws, etc. Many areas have random drug testing policies in place. Randomly testing employees uninvolved under suspicion of drug use is unconstitutional because the Fourth Amendment states that the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause... People who test negative for an illegal substances do not prove random drug testing is a successful deterrent, it can only prove that they have not consumed illegal drugs recently. If someone is hiring for a new employee that has a drug conviction on their record, it would be reasonable perhaps, but privacy is a right.
Taking a field sobriety test easily results in the officer explaining in court that you were unbalanced or slow. The test only serves to add information that police can use against you in court and won 't exonerate you if the officer thinks you 're
During a sport all the athletes are required to do drug testing, whether or not they have drugs in their system. These athletes take a urine test which is then sent to a lab. Although that is very effective, some drugs do not show up in the urine like alcohol, oxycodone, methadone to name a few. If sport teams do both urine and blood testing, they could rule out more
Next, drug testing recipients is not a good use for taxpayer money. Florida started enforcing drug tests so taxpayers would know their money was not being wasted. and of the 800 people tested, only one person tested positive (Cunha). If they tested 800 people and only one tested positive-that is a waste of money. Drug testing individuals costs more than it saves (Cunha).
“Employers justify drug and alcohol testing policies by arguing that they are necessary for promoting health and safety in the workplace. Employees and unions argue that the policies either violate human rights law and/or the privacy of employees, although the infringement on privacy rights is the more prevalent basis for challenging such policies. ”This article further states that No employee can be subject to random, unannounced alcohol or drug testing, except as part of an agreed upon rehabilitative program following treatment for drug or alcohol abuse;• An employer may require a drug or alcohol test where the facts give rise to reasonable cause; and• An employer may require a drug and alcohol test as part of an investiga- tion into an accident or incident in the
There are no studies to show that these drug test are going to help the drug problem. We need to find something that will help the drug problem in schools without violating the student and parents privacy. According to Sifferlin (2015)¨The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) released a policy statement on Monday saying it opposes randomly drug testing students because there’s not enough evidence to show it’s effective, and because random testing can damage relationships between students and their schools. It’s also a possible infringement on privacy, the group says¨ (para. 2). Why create this space between teachers and students, coaches and athletes, parents and children, all for a simple drug test?
A major ethical consideration put forth by opponents of drug testing is that the process amounts to an unwarranted invasion of privacy. WDT impacts on privacy in relation to the right to personal i.e. bodily integrity. National legislation on this matter is often the same as that for searches, which requires the consent of the person concerned to be lawful. The question of consent is, however, a thorny one. Most guidelines for WDT (such as the ILO Guiding Principles on Drug and Alcohol Testing, 1996) require that informed consent be obtained before testing.
The book Jekyll and Hyde shows how abusing drugs can destroy friendships. If we do not stop drug users early in life, they will have much more serious consequences when they grow up. ¨One area of significant controversy regards targeting various testing populations: Is it better to test only students suspected of drug use, to do random drug testing of particular groups of students (e.g., athletes) (Arnold, 1996; DeMitchell, 1995), or to go further and randomly test all students?(Yamaguchi, Ryoko, Johnston, and O’Malley)¨ Some people argue whether we should only test particular groups of students, or students have been suspected for drug use. However, there should be no argument because the answer is simple. Drug tests in high school need to be randomly enforced on all students so that all teenagers can live a drug free, healthy