How many of you would be panicking if...

[lokiju]

Originally posted by: farmercal
I don't do drugs so it wouldn't matter to me.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: pclstyle
it's being done

urine/blood @ pharmaceutical company. since they haven't administered any tests past the original pending-employment physical/drug screening, i guess they're taking advantage of the oh-too-comfortable state their employees have fallen into

well the cost of testing 120k employees at 75 dollars a pop is 9 million dollars...... cost and time prohibitive. It would not happen.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Argo
Haven't touched a drug since college so I won't care.

you also don't have anything illegal in your home so it'd be fine for them to do random searches there too?

Personally guilty or not my privacy is more important than my current job. If they wer epaying me 6 or 7 figures I'd reconsider my privacy policy.

What you have in your home normally doesn't affect your performance at work. What you put in your body may.

Good so the moment they can document a reasonable suspicion that I am impaired at work they can test me. What I do after I walk out the door is my business.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Argo
Haven't touched a drug since college so I won't care.

you also don't have anything illegal in your home so it'd be fine for them to do random searches there too?

Personally guilty or not my privacy is more important than my current job. If they wer epaying me 6 or 7 figures I'd reconsider my privacy policy.

So apparantly in your opinion the degree of the privacy violation (drug test vs home search) is irrelevant to whether you would allow it, but the amount they pay you is relevant... hrmmm...

Give me liberty, or give me money!

 

[monk3y]

I've been clean since 18 Dec. 2004

 

[Rickten]

bud stays in your hair for up to six months. Many companies are moving away from urine and going to hair samples.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Argo
Haven't touched a drug since college so I won't care.

you also don't have anything illegal in your home so it'd be fine for them to do random searches there too?

Personally guilty or not my privacy is more important than my current job. If they wer epaying me 6 or 7 figures I'd reconsider my privacy policy.

What you have in your home normally doesn't affect your performance at work. What you put in your body may.

A manager can without a doubt assess the performance of their employee without a urinalysis. It happens everyday.

 

[Mr N8]

The only way it would bother me is if they scheduled it during a busy time for me. I'd willingly take the test, since I have nothing to hide.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Argo
Haven't touched a drug since college so I won't care.

you also don't have anything illegal in your home so it'd be fine for them to do random searches there too?

Personally guilty or not my privacy is more important than my current job. If they wer epaying me 6 or 7 figures I'd reconsider my privacy policy.

So apparantly in your opinion the degree of the privacy violation (drug test vs home search) is irrelevant to whether you would allow it, but the amount they pay you is relevant... hrmmm...

Give me liberty, or give me money!

Exactly. They aren't paying me enough to violate my principles.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Linflas

Originally posted by: BigJ

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Argo
Haven't touched a drug since college so I won't care.

you also don't have anything illegal in your home so it'd be fine for them to do random searches there too?

Personally guilty or not my privacy is more important than my current job. If they wer epaying me 6 or 7 figures I'd reconsider my privacy policy.

What you have in your home normally doesn't affect your performance at work. What you put in your body may.

Good so the moment they can document a reasonable suspicion that I am impaired at work they can test me. What I do after I walk out the door is my business.

If you come into work drunk, or high, or after using any type of illicit substance, a company should have the right to force you to take a drug test, and terminate you if they so choose.

As long as it doesn't affect how you do your job, as an employer I wouldn't care what you do.

 

[erub]

I wouldn't want to have to deal with a druggie at work (esp. if they were within my immediate group), so I'd be for it

Even if they aren't in your group, they are affecting the bottom line, hurting revenues, which could cost you your job, or at the least make your stock options/shares worth less

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: erub
I wouldn't want to have to deal with a druggie at work (esp. if they were within my immediate group), so I'd be for it

Even if they aren't in your group, they are affecting the bottom line, hurting revenues, which could cost you your job, or at the least make your stock options/shares worth less

Think about what your saying. Someone who is not perfoming at their job is a candidate for termination whether on drugs or not. Its irrelevant if they are not performing.

 

[Red Dawn]

No problem man

 

[Argo]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Argo
Haven't touched a drug since college so I won't care.

you also don't have anything illegal in your home so it'd be fine for them to do random searches there too?

Personally guilty or not my privacy is more important than my current job. If they wer epaying me 6 or 7 figures I'd reconsider my privacy policy.

No, I don't have anything illegal in my house either, but regardless you're comparing apples to oranges. Plus they're not violating your liberty, since drug testing is optional. The catch is - they can fire you if you don't take it. But that was part of the contract you signed/agreed to when you joined the company. The beauty of free market economy, employer get to make their own rules.

 

[JulesMaximus]

It wouldn't be a problem for me. I haven't done any drugs...lately.

 

[Dacalo]

I don't do drugs and never have, nothing to worry about.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: erub
I wouldn't want to have to deal with a druggie at work (esp. if they were within my immediate group), so I'd be for it

Even if they aren't in your group, they are affecting the bottom line, hurting revenues, which could cost you your job, or at the least make your stock options/shares worth less

Well what if the druggie smoked a joint on the weekend when they're not working?

That's a lame excuse. If they're high while on the job, and not performing up to par, then they should be disciplined based on their performance... whether drugs are involved or not. Not what's in their urine.

 

[psydancerqt]

i wouldnt mind

 

[Accipiter22]

Originally posted by: gigapet
either way my company doesn't pay me enough to keep me around for that kind of invasion of privacy.

I'm fairly certain it's illegal to do that once you're hired in MA, CT also.....what state you in?

 

[FreshPrince]

I don't have a problem with it as I have nothing to hide.

I would, if they did it selectively. If it was company wide and everyone from the janitor to the CEO were require to take the test..then it's fine with me. I actually welcome it.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: Argo

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Argo
Haven't touched a drug since college so I won't care.

you also don't have anything illegal in your home so it'd be fine for them to do random searches there too?

Personally guilty or not my privacy is more important than my current job. If they wer epaying me 6 or 7 figures I'd reconsider my privacy policy.

No, I don't have anything illegal in my house either, but regardless you're comparing apples to oranges. Plus they're not violating your liberty, since drug testing is optional. The catch is - they can fire you if you don't take it. But that was part of the contract you signed/agreed to when you joined the company. The beauty of free market economy, employer get to make their own rules.

Wow, that must suck working in the US with no worker's rights. Every job i've been in, there's always been easy access to worker's rights information... whether it's pamphlets on the tables, or posters on the wall.

 

[BigJ]

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: Argo

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Argo
Haven't touched a drug since college so I won't care.

you also don't have anything illegal in your home so it'd be fine for them to do random searches there too?

Personally guilty or not my privacy is more important than my current job. If they wer epaying me 6 or 7 figures I'd reconsider my privacy policy.

No, I don't have anything illegal in my house either, but regardless you're comparing apples to oranges. Plus they're not violating your liberty, since drug testing is optional. The catch is - they can fire you if you don't take it. But that was part of the contract you signed/agreed to when you joined the company. The beauty of free market economy, employer get to make their own rules.

Wow, that must suck working in the US with no worker's rights. Every job i've been in, there's always been easy access to worker's rights information... whether it's pamphlets on the tables, or posters on the wall.

Don't want to take the drug test, don't work there.

 

[gigapet]

Originally posted by: Argo

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Argo
Haven't touched a drug since college so I won't care.

you also don't have anything illegal in your home so it'd be fine for them to do random searches there too?

Personally guilty or not my privacy is more important than my current job. If they wer epaying me 6 or 7 figures I'd reconsider my privacy policy.

No, I don't have anything illegal in my house either, but regardless you're comparing apples to oranges. Plus they're not violating your liberty, since drug testing is optional. The catch is - they can fire you if you don't take it. But that was part of the contract you signed/agreed to when you joined the company. The beauty of free market economy, employer get to make their own rules.

Searching your home for questionable items could be an optional part of the contract you signed as well was my point. An unreasonable search in my eyes includes that of me and my belongings. I would not consent to it under any circumstances. And if that meant I couldnt work for some nazi corp with backwards ass policies....no skin off my back its a free market I can work for myself.

 

[TallBill]

I've taken 7 in the past 2 years. So bring it on.

 

[mugs]

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: gigapet

Originally posted by: Argo
Haven't touched a drug since college so I won't care.

you also don't have anything illegal in your home so it'd be fine for them to do random searches there too?

Personally guilty or not my privacy is more important than my current job. If they wer epaying me 6 or 7 figures I'd reconsider my privacy policy.

So apparantly in your opinion the degree of the privacy violation (drug test vs home search) is irrelevant to whether you would allow it, but the amount they pay you is relevant... hrmmm...

Give me liberty, or give me money!

Exactly. They aren't paying me enough to violate my principles.

No, you have no principles if money is a factor. You just have angst.