A few years ago I asked a customer for a list of employees, so I could verify who could purchase on their account. They replied with their personnel files. Luckily it didn’t have social security numbers, but it had a LOT of personal information. Medical records, drug test results, stuff like that.
Alcohol, yes, but with marijuana, since the substance they test for stays in your system for a long time, no. Though the argument has always been that it’s illegal and so more serious. And technically it’s still illegal at the federal level, so o guess technically that’s true, but the federal government doesn’t often enforce it and in several states it’s legalized. If it ever gets legalized at the federal level and they still do hair tests instead of blood tests, though, I don’t see how they can justify that.
But in reality, pretty much the only people who get punished for marijuana use are either minorities or someone being targeted for something else they did and weed is just an easy excuse to fire them, put them in for-profit prisons, murder them legally, etc.
I don’t know, I guess so? Most drug tests are severely flawed, because many don’t test if someone is under the influence right now, they can test positive even when it’s longer ago and outside of worktime.
So in essence, you can get fired for being under influence at work, even though you’re not, because these tests are not good enough. And I think that’s nuts, aside from the massive invasion of privacy of giving an employer a claim to you bodily fluids.
Sure, you’re not supposed to use drugs. But is it your employer’s task to enforce the law? No, they’re not the police, and it’s none of their business what people do at home.
What are you suggesting? That they should run a urine test for magic mushrooms on every pilot before every flight? Obviously this was a very bad situation. But what scenario would have prevented this?
Right, but the practicality? It would still be hard and expensive to catch every outlier case such as this one with drug testing.
[edit] I’ve looked it up and in the Netherlands, drug testing is only legal for some very specific professions where there is a risk of serious, large-scale harm such aa for instance pilots, like you mentioned. Other than that, it’s illegal because it’s medical information, and considered too invasive.
A few years ago I asked a customer for a list of employees, so I could verify who could purchase on their account. They replied with their personnel files. Luckily it didn’t have social security numbers, but it had a LOT of personal information. Medical records, drug test results, stuff like that.
The whole workplace drug testing thing is so wild to me. An employer can actually lay claim to your bodily fluids? Absolutely mental.
In the Netherlands, it’s very simple:
Even if you’re forklift certified? Or other heavy equipment operator (crane, excavator, front loader, big truck)?
In the US, can each of these occupations get shitfaced the second they’re off work?
Alcohol, yes, but with marijuana, since the substance they test for stays in your system for a long time, no. Though the argument has always been that it’s illegal and so more serious. And technically it’s still illegal at the federal level, so o guess technically that’s true, but the federal government doesn’t often enforce it and in several states it’s legalized. If it ever gets legalized at the federal level and they still do hair tests instead of blood tests, though, I don’t see how they can justify that.
But in reality, pretty much the only people who get punished for marijuana use are either minorities or someone being targeted for something else they did and weed is just an easy excuse to fire them, put them in for-profit prisons, murder them legally, etc.
Umm, I don’t know, probably. I’m just curious about jobs like that in another country
Why would that matter?
I don’t know, I guess so? Most drug tests are severely flawed, because many don’t test if someone is under the influence right now, they can test positive even when it’s longer ago and outside of worktime.
So in essence, you can get fired for being under influence at work, even though you’re not, because these tests are not good enough. And I think that’s nuts, aside from the massive invasion of privacy of giving an employer a claim to you bodily fluids.
Sure, you’re not supposed to use drugs. But is it your employer’s task to enforce the law? No, they’re not the police, and it’s none of their business what people do at home.
deleted by creator
Here you go:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/aug/23/us-pilot-magic-mushrooms-plane-engines
What are you suggesting? That they should run a urine test for magic mushrooms on every pilot before every flight? Obviously this was a very bad situation. But what scenario would have prevented this?
That drug testing for machinery which can cause serious harm isn’t such an out there concept.
Right, but the practicality? It would still be hard and expensive to catch every outlier case such as this one with drug testing.
[edit] I’ve looked it up and in the Netherlands, drug testing is only legal for some very specific professions where there is a risk of serious, large-scale harm such aa for instance pilots, like you mentioned. Other than that, it’s illegal because it’s medical information, and considered too invasive.