Treating welfare recipients like criminals is pretty shitty. But rick scott is using companies he is down with to do the testing so i guess it all works out with him getting paid.
Would you consider making a potential employee submit to a drug test being treated like a criminal?
Yes
Wow
i agree with rich. corporations exist to make profit, and everyone knows that. they're not trying to treat people like criminals when they make you piss in a cup - they're just trying to protect their investment in their employees.
Not to mention that their insurance companies almost certainly require it, and if they don't require it they would just raise the premiums substantially if testing isn't done.
I've worked for several corporations (including my current job), none of which have ever drug tested me. Are you saying that corporations and insurance cos require the right to drug test or that they actually require drug testing. Not all corporate employees drive trucks or operate heavy machinery.
So if you test positive, what happens? Do they pay you more money so you can manage to support your drug habit?
The Florida law states that you will not be eligible for any welfare benefits for at least a year and "could" be charged with child abuse.
As far as I know the law only applies to new applicants and not current welfare recipients.
I'm sure this only applies to illegal drugs and not to Oxycontin and all the other goodies peddled by Florida's pain clinics... easy guess which lobbyists pushed for this.
they're just trying to protect their investment in their employees.
Just like when corps take out insurance policies on their employees without their knowledge or their families. Only to get paid millions when an employee dies and the family gets 0.
they're just trying to protect their investment in their employees.
Just like when corps take out insurance policies on their employees without their knowledge or their families. Only to get paid millions when an employee dies and the family gets 0.
yeah, same rationale, i guess. i don't mind the drug test thing (actually, i hate drug tests but if someone's offering me a good job, i'll take the test), but the insurance policy move is low.
they're just trying to protect their investment in their employees.
Just like when corps take out insurance policies on their employees without their knowledge or their families. Only to get paid millions when an employee dies and the family gets 0.
I'm pretty certain this is illegal.
Your employer can only take out life insurance out on you legally with your written permission.
I just think the whole process of having to get a drug test for a new job its sucky. I totally understand most of the rationale behind it but I still dont like it. I don't do any drugs and barely drink so having to take a drug test always makes me feel like I'm being treated like a criminal. It just sucks to feel that way.
Drug or alcohol tests for drivers is one thing but drug tests demanded by employers or wellfare agencies are some ridiculous shit that pretty much anywhere else would be unthinkable. For a country that constantly needs to remind itself that it's the freest in the world, you guys seem to tolerate a lot of crazy shit... just sayin...
Drug or alcohol tests for drivers is one thing but drug tests demanded by employers or wellfare agencies are some ridiculous shit that pretty much anywhere else would be unthinkable. For a country that constantly needs to remind itself that it's the freest in the world, you guys seem to tolerate a lot of crazy shit... just sayin...
I agree.
Operate heavy machinery/fly airplanes ===> Drug tests
Work at 7-11 ===> Fuck it.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
Frank said:
Drug or alcohol tests for drivers is one thing but drug tests demanded by employers or wellfare agencies are some ridiculous shit that pretty much anywhere else would be unthinkable. For a country that constantly needs to remind itself that it's the freest in the world, you guys seem to tolerate a lot of crazy shit... just sayin...
Like you living here.
billbradleyYou want BBQ sauce? Get the fuck out of my house. 2,890 Posts
Frank, not everyone has the option of passing on a job for something better due to a required drug test. Especially now with so many people out of work. If taking a drug test is part of the pre-employment requirements most will take the test in order to get the job.
Frank, not everyone has the option of passing on a job for something better due to a required drug test. Especially now with so many people out of work. If taking a drug test is part of the pre-employment requirements most will take the test in order to get the job.
this
and ketan's point about enrolling people in treatment programs if they test positive is the only way that testing will work
Frank, not everyone has the option of passing on a job for something better due to a required drug test. Especially now with so many people out of work. If taking a drug test is part of the pre-employment requirements most will take the test in order to get the job.
I don't think it's right that any company can require such tests. Unless as said above, it's for piloting an airplane, train or something similar.
billbradleyYou want BBQ sauce? Get the fuck out of my house. 2,890 Posts
Frank said:
billbradley said:
Frank, not everyone has the option of passing on a job for something better due to a required drug test. Especially now with so many people out of work. If taking a drug test is part of the pre-employment requirements most will take the test in order to get the job.
I don't think it's right that any company can require such tests. Unless as said above, it's for piloting an airplane, train or something similar.
Frank.....Let me ask you.....I work in a Chemical Plant with literally 10's of thousands of gallons of highly flammable liquids. One major screw-up and the lives of 100's of people can be in danger......would that be a good enough scenario to require testing?
If its a private employer they can do anything they want as long as they don't discriminate or infringe on any constitutional right. You don't like it? Get another job. End of story. Welcome to America.
If its a private employer they can do anything they want as long as they don't discriminate or infringe on any constitutional right. You don't like it? Get another job. End of story. Welcome to America.
If its a private employer they can do anything they want as long as they don't discriminate or infringe on any constitutional right. You don't like it? Get another job. End of story. Welcome to America.
This is the sort of assholish thinking that has us on the way to the world of "Rollerball."
Apparently employees can be required to lick the shoes of their employers every day and anyone who complains about it is being un-American. Just lick the shoes. It's the least you can do for your wonderful corporate overlords. In fact, it's a privilege. And they're really nice shoes, not like the shoes you freaking worker bees wear.
You missed a spot.
yeah dawgs theres lots of employers that require that word son
Frank.....Let me ask you.....I work in a Chemical Plant with literally 10's of thousands of gallons of highly flammable liquids. One major screw-up and the lives of 100's of people can be in danger......would that be a good enough scenario to require testing?
I think that if or if not someone uses recreational drugs on the weekend should not be a big factor here. Before employing somebody, you can interview them and have them do tests etc to find out if they are alert, inteligent, react well under stress etc. There are infinite legitimate ways to test if someone is right for a job or not. In my experience, alcoholism, trouble at home are responsible for most severe fuck-ups at work and elsewhere. How do you test against those risks?
I often took rides from friends who were drug users. They all were responsible enough to never drive while intoxicated and I never had a feeling I wasn't safe witht them behind the wheel. I also was working constructions for a while and the rides from the company's headquarters to the construction sites always were horrible. Those guys drove like idiots and I'm sure none of them ever touched any drug besides alcohol and coffee. Would you rather put your life into the hand of someone who smoked a joint the night before or an angry alcoholic?
If its a private employer they can do anything they want as long as they don't discriminate or infringe on any constitutional right. You don't like it? Get another job. End of story. Welcome to America.
This is the sort of assholish thinking that has us on the way to the world of "Rollerball."
Apparently employees can be required to lick the shoes of their employers every day and anyone who complains about it is being un-American. Just lick the shoes. It's the least you can do for your wonderful corporate overlords. In fact, it's a privilege. And they're really nice shoes, not like the shoes you freaking worker bees wear.
You missed a spot.
If you apply for and get hired to lick shoes every day, then get to lickin'
If its a private employer they can do anything they want as long as they don't discriminate or infringe on any constitutional right. You don't like it? Get another job. End of story. Welcome to America.
This is the sort of assholish thinking that has us on the way to the world of "Rollerball."
Apparently employees can be required to lick the shoes of their employers every day and anyone who complains about it is being un-American. Just lick the shoes. It's the least you can do for your wonderful corporate overlords. In fact, it's a privilege. And they're really nice shoes, not like the shoes you freaking worker bees wear.
You missed a spot.
If you're apply for and get hired to lick shoes every day, then get to lickin'
No, the job is being an associate at a New York law firm.
The licking is a perk. Right?
the perk is getting to help losers like you out for free.
If its a private employer they can do anything they want as long as they don't discriminate or infringe on any constitutional right. You don't like it? Get another job. End of story. Welcome to America.
This is the sort of assholish thinking that has us on the way to the world of "Rollerball."
Apparently employees can be required to lick the shoes of their employers every day and anyone who complains about it is being un-American. Just lick the shoes. It's the least you can do for your wonderful corporate overlords. In fact, it's a privilege. And they're really nice shoes, not like the shoes you freaking worker bees wear.
You missed a spot.
yeah dawgs theres lots of employers that require that word son
Doesn't matter. If there were, you'd be first in line. And bragging about your hot new gig.
And the shoelicking is just a metaphor. In real life much worse shit happens. People willingly go into Massey mines. And there are plenty of people (like Rand Paul) defending companies like Massey that deliberately cut safety procedures just to make a few extra bucks.
Oh, but they can always find other jobs, so it's okay.
how dare this country allow people to work jobs that they want to work
If its a private employer they can do anything they want as long as they don't discriminate or infringe on any constitutional right. You don't like it? Get another job. End of story. Welcome to America.
This is the sort of assholish thinking that has us on the way to the world of "Rollerball."
Apparently employees can be required to lick the shoes of their employers every day and anyone who complains about it is being un-American. Just lick the shoes. It's the least you can do for your wonderful corporate overlords. In fact, it's a privilege. And they're really nice shoes, not like the shoes you freaking worker bees wear.
You missed a spot.
yeah dawgs theres lots of employers that require that word son
Doesn't matter. If there were, you'd be first in line. And bragging about your hot new gig.
And the shoelicking is just a metaphor. In real life much worse shit happens. People willingly go into Massey mines. And there are plenty of people (like Rand Paul) defending companies like Massey that deliberately cut safety procedures just to make a few extra bucks.
Oh, but they can always find other jobs, so it's okay.
how dare this country allow people to work jobs that they want to work
The work isn't the question. It's the terms under which the work takes place that are in question.
People like you think it's perfectly acceptable for employers to treat employees like shit. People like me are happy that we have all sorts of laws in place to try to limit the abuse. We should have more such laws.
So if you test positive, what happens? Do they pay you more money so you can manage to support your drug habit?
The Florida law states that you will not be eligible for any welfare benefits for at least a year and "could" be charged with child abuse.
As far as I know the law only applies to new applicants and not current welfare recipients.
I'm sure this only applies to illegal drugs and not to Oxycontin and all the other goodies peddled by Florida's pain clinics... easy guess which lobbyists pushed for this.
Oxy is still a controlled substance and you still need a prescription for it, no matter how easy that prescription might be to get.
Frank.....Let me ask you.....I work in a Chemical Plant with literally 10's of thousands of gallons of highly flammable liquids. One major screw-up and the lives of 100's of people can be in danger......would that be a good enough scenario to require testing?
I think that if or if not someone uses recreational drugs on the weekend should not be a big factor here. Before employing somebody, you can interview them and have them do tests etc to find out if they are alert, inteligent, react well under stress etc. There are infinite legitimate ways to test if someone is right for a job or not. In my experience, alcoholism, trouble at home are responsible for most severe fuck-ups at work and elsewhere. How do you test against those risks?
I often took rides from friends who were drug users. They all were responsible enough to never drive while intoxicated and I never had a feeling I wasn't safe witht them behind the wheel. I also was working constructions for a while and the rides from the company's headquarters to the construction sites always were horrible. Those guys drove like idiots and I'm sure none of them ever touched any drug besides alcohol and coffee. Would you rather put your life into the hand of someone who smoked a joint the night before or an angry alcoholic?
Frank..... I agree with you....and by no means am I suggesting that a complete moron or drunk is any more or less dangerous than a drug user.
BUT
In a scenario where a tragedy does happen at the workplace one of the first things that's gonna happen is the person who caused it is going to be tested to see if they are under the influence of something. The company is going to be sued as they have the deepest pockets. And the company is going to do everything in their power to minimize their liability. That's going to include terminating anyone who doesn't follow safety procedures, visually monitoring their employees for fatigue and alcohol use, and testing up front for drugs.
If it didn't benefit the big bad corporation in some monetary way they would not be spending the millions of dollars on drug testing that they do.....they are certainly not doing it to simply humiliate or insult the potential employee.
If its a private employer they can do anything they want as long as they don't discriminate or infringe on any constitutional right. You don't like it? Get another job. End of story. Welcome to America.
This is the sort of assholish thinking that has us on the way to the world of "Rollerball."
Apparently employees can be required to lick the shoes of their employers every day and anyone who complains about it is being un-American. Just lick the shoes. It's the least you can do for your wonderful corporate overlords. In fact, it's a privilege. And they're really nice shoes, not like the shoes you freaking worker bees wear.
You missed a spot.
yeah dawgs theres lots of employers that require that word son
Doesn't matter. If there were, you'd be first in line. And bragging about your hot new gig.
And the shoelicking is just a metaphor. In real life much worse shit happens. People willingly go into Massey mines. And there are plenty of people (like Rand Paul) defending companies like Massey that deliberately cut safety procedures just to make a few extra bucks.
Oh, but they can always find other jobs, so it's okay.
how dare this country allow people to work jobs that they want to work
The work isn't the question. It's the terms under which the work takes place that are in question.
People like you think it's perfectly acceptable for employers to treat employees like shit. People like me are happy that we have all sorts of laws in place to try to limit the abuse. We should have more such laws.
really, tell me more about what i think
No need. This once you've made it very clear.
believing that someone is free to work in whatever conditions they want = BRIAN SUPPORTS EMPLOYERS WHIPPING THEIR EMPLOYEES IF THEY AREN'T WORKING HARD ENOUGH
Comments
I've worked for several corporations (including my current job), none of which have ever drug tested me. Are you saying that corporations and insurance cos require the right to drug test or that they actually require drug testing. Not all corporate employees drive trucks or operate heavy machinery.
The Florida law states that you will not be eligible for any welfare benefits for at least a year and "could" be charged with child abuse.
As far as I know the law only applies to new applicants and not current welfare recipients.
I'm sure this only applies to illegal drugs and not to Oxycontin and all the other goodies peddled by Florida's pain clinics... easy guess which lobbyists pushed for this.
Just like when corps take out insurance policies on their employees without their knowledge or their families. Only to get paid millions when an employee dies and the family gets 0.
yeah, same rationale, i guess. i don't mind the drug test thing (actually, i hate drug tests but if someone's offering me a good job, i'll take the test), but the insurance policy move is low.
I'm pretty certain this is illegal.
Your employer can only take out life insurance out on you legally with your written permission.
I agree.
Operate heavy machinery/fly airplanes ===> Drug tests
Work at 7-11 ===> Fuck it.
Like you living here.
and ketan's point about enrolling people in treatment programs if they test positive is the only way that testing will work
I don't think it's right that any company can require such tests. Unless as said above, it's for piloting an airplane, train or something similar.
I don't necessarily think it is right either.
I think that if or if not someone uses recreational drugs on the weekend should not be a big factor here. Before employing somebody, you can interview them and have them do tests etc to find out if they are alert, inteligent, react well under stress etc. There are infinite legitimate ways to test if someone is right for a job or not. In my experience, alcoholism, trouble at home are responsible for most severe fuck-ups at work and elsewhere. How do you test against those risks?
I often took rides from friends who were drug users. They all were responsible enough to never drive while intoxicated and I never had a feeling I wasn't safe witht them behind the wheel. I also was working constructions for a while and the rides from the company's headquarters to the construction sites always were horrible. Those guys drove like idiots and I'm sure none of them ever touched any drug besides alcohol and coffee. Would you rather put your life into the hand of someone who smoked a joint the night before or an angry alcoholic?
If you apply for and get hired to lick shoes every day, then get to lickin'
the perk is getting to help losers like you out for free.
Frank..... I agree with you....and by no means am I suggesting that a complete moron or drunk is any more or less dangerous than a drug user.
BUT
In a scenario where a tragedy does happen at the workplace one of the first things that's gonna happen is the person who caused it is going to be tested to see if they are under the influence of something. The company is going to be sued as they have the deepest pockets. And the company is going to do everything in their power to minimize their liability. That's going to include terminating anyone who doesn't follow safety procedures, visually monitoring their employees for fatigue and alcohol use, and testing up front for drugs.
If it didn't benefit the big bad corporation in some monetary way they would not be spending the millions of dollars on drug testing that they do.....they are certainly not doing it to simply humiliate or insult the potential employee.
is that it?