Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/17/84; site nbires.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!hplabs!hao!nbires!rcd From: rcd@nbires.UUCP (Dick Dunn) Newsgroups: net.jobs Subject: Re: Urinalysis...Lie Detectors...all the new rage? Message-ID: <652@nbires.UUCP> Date: Tue, 11-Mar-86 03:40:33 EST Article-I.D.: nbires.652 Posted: Tue Mar 11 03:40:33 1986 Date-Received: Fri, 14-Mar-86 06:28:42 EST References: <1336@pucc-i> <172@lll-lcc.UUcp> <2547@pixar.pixar> Organization: NBI,Inc, Boulder CO Lines: 77 > Let's say I'm an employer. I want smart people to work for me. I > want honest people to work for me. I want responsible people to work for me. > I don't want people who are in a self-destruct mode. That means I don't want > people with drug habits. The time of day they do the drugs is quite irrelevant. Do you care about the difference between use and abuse? Do you care whether the employee's habits off the job affect on-job performance? Do you care about the difference between drugs which can and cannot be detected by urinalysis? Well, no, I didn't think you did...so you, the not- so-clever employer, will get what you deserve: nobody who ever smokes pot, as you wish, but all the alcoholics and cokeheads that you can afford to pay. WAKE UP, folks. Employment is not bondage and servitude; it is a contractual agreement between employee and employer to provide services in exchange for money. YES, use of drugs WILL make a difference in job performance. The two drugs which are most commonly abused in the United States, and which cause 99+% of all of the on-the-job problems, are alcohol and tobacco. Any corporate "drug program" which ignores these two is a farce. Where (if anywhere) do you draw a line? Here's an example: I'm about 20 lb. or so overweight, and I'm sure it affects my peformance in some ways. So does that mean that my employer can demand that I go on a diet? (Please keep in mind that legality of my behavior is NOT the real issue. I am not employed by a law-enforcement agency; it is not the task of my employer to enforce the law. The legal issues of drug use of an employee are not the concern of my employer any more than, say, running stopsigns or cheating on income tax--if it doesn't affect job performance, it doesn't matter.) > I'm not telling you not to do drugs, I'm just telling you that if you > do you can't work for me. I see nothing unfair about that. The famous Golden Rule--if you got the gold, you make the rules. Sure, everybody has constitutional rights...only you may have to give them up if you want a job. This is an obvious way to force you to give up your rights, since it is very difficult to survive in today's world without a job. (Think about that practically, not idealistically.) To be honest, though, I agree that my employer has the right to expect that I will not use drugs on the job (I beg an exception for caffeine!), nor will I arrive at or return to work under the influence of drugs. I've seen important files succumb to the hands of a tipsy super- user! If my employer wishes to regulate my conduct off the job, I may consider the suggestion, but I will probably expect that my salary should be increased by the ratio 168/40 (the number of hours in a week to the erstwhile number of work hours in a week) since that is the increase in the amount of time for which expectations are being placed upon me. Whether I actually go off getting stoned on my off hours (I don't) is irrelevant--I'm not considering what I might do so much as whether I might grant someone else the privilege of knowing what I do. If an employer has the right to regulate an employer's off-hours conduct (even if it does not materially affect job performance), then it only seems fair that employees should be able to demand a complete accounting of the employer's business practices, short and long term business plans, salary structure (by employee), etc., etc., so that the employee can verify that the corporation for which he works is not allowing itself to be impaired by unsound business habits. It never ceases to amaze me how much crap some people are willing to put up with to make a buck. I am ever more amazed at how some inept employers grasp at straws like the urinalysis kick to try to find excuses for their own inability to run a sound business, or to identify employees who cannot perform their jobs and just FIRE THEM. (Rant! Rave! If you want to know why the US is falling behind Japan, don't look at Japan for the answer-- look at the litigious, finger-pointing nature of our own business world.) I am, at least for the time being, working for a sane and relatively enlightened employer. However much I might grumble from time to time, I DO give my employer my best efforts unhindered by drugs. My employer, in turn, trusts me, pays me well, does not expect me to submit to the polygraph, and makes no claim on my excreta! -- Dick Dunn {hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd (303)444-5710 x3086 ...A friend of the devil is a friend of mine.