The practice of randomly drug testing prospective and current employees is a highly debated issue.
Many people align themselves with employers and argue that employees should not be taking performance altering drugs, because it could compromise output and safety.
Others side with employees who argue that random drug testing is a violation of personal privacy.
Opponents Many civil liberties organizations, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), argue that pre-employment and random drug testing is a violation of a person's privacy.
If their performance is satisfactory and there is no reason to suspect drug abuse at the workplace, they should not be subjected to testing.
According to some statistics, the low-quality drug tests that most employers administer are prone to showing false positives.
It is estimated that approximately 10% - 30% of positives are false.
Additionally, opponents argue that drug testing does not indicate when an employee was under the influence of drugs, only that drugs are present in the employee's body when the urine test was administered.
This means that an employee could come to work stone-cold sober every day but still test positive on a drug test.
In the eye of opponents, this is a flawed method of determining impairment.
Proponents Supporters of drug testing argue that they have the right to know whether or not their employees are taking drugs because an "altered" employee may compromise safety and output.
According to proponents, statistics indicate that employers lose thousands of dollars each year because of substance abusing employees.
While the extent to which this is a problem is controversial, there is no doubt that this is sometimes the case.
Additionally, employers argue that they would be the ones who face persecution and liability if workplace safety was compromised by a "high" employee.
This is especially relevant for employees who are directly responsible for the safety of others.
Pilots and bus drivers, for example, should be tested more frequently in order to ensure they are not going to compromise the public's safety.
Laws by State While federal does not prohibit drug testing, many states have ruled it unconstitutional to randomly test state employees.
In addition to state employee unions, many people are filing suit against private employers.
Opinions about drug testing vary significantly across the nations; however, one thing remains certain-drug testing should be conducted in accordance with the Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).
If your employer has failed to meet the SAMHSA standards, they may be liable for discrimination.
For more information about unlawful drug tests, contact the San Antonio employment lawyers of Melton & Kumler, LLP today.
Many people align themselves with employers and argue that employees should not be taking performance altering drugs, because it could compromise output and safety.
Others side with employees who argue that random drug testing is a violation of personal privacy.
Opponents Many civil liberties organizations, such as the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), argue that pre-employment and random drug testing is a violation of a person's privacy.
If their performance is satisfactory and there is no reason to suspect drug abuse at the workplace, they should not be subjected to testing.
According to some statistics, the low-quality drug tests that most employers administer are prone to showing false positives.
It is estimated that approximately 10% - 30% of positives are false.
Additionally, opponents argue that drug testing does not indicate when an employee was under the influence of drugs, only that drugs are present in the employee's body when the urine test was administered.
This means that an employee could come to work stone-cold sober every day but still test positive on a drug test.
In the eye of opponents, this is a flawed method of determining impairment.
Proponents Supporters of drug testing argue that they have the right to know whether or not their employees are taking drugs because an "altered" employee may compromise safety and output.
According to proponents, statistics indicate that employers lose thousands of dollars each year because of substance abusing employees.
While the extent to which this is a problem is controversial, there is no doubt that this is sometimes the case.
Additionally, employers argue that they would be the ones who face persecution and liability if workplace safety was compromised by a "high" employee.
This is especially relevant for employees who are directly responsible for the safety of others.
Pilots and bus drivers, for example, should be tested more frequently in order to ensure they are not going to compromise the public's safety.
Laws by State While federal does not prohibit drug testing, many states have ruled it unconstitutional to randomly test state employees.
In addition to state employee unions, many people are filing suit against private employers.
Opinions about drug testing vary significantly across the nations; however, one thing remains certain-drug testing should be conducted in accordance with the Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA).
If your employer has failed to meet the SAMHSA standards, they may be liable for discrimination.
For more information about unlawful drug tests, contact the San Antonio employment lawyers of Melton & Kumler, LLP today.
Source...