how do you feel about random drug tests?

[dilligaf]

Been involved in the trucking industry for about 16/17 years. Federal regulations require random testing. The way I look at it is, if you can't pass a piss test then don't get into truck driving. It's that simple.

 

[trplnkl]

The one and only problem I have with random drug testing is there is no guarantee that it is/will be truly random.

 

[dilligaf]

You may be right Trp. All we have to go by is what they say. Pkg doesn't have randoms but feeders have to because they are specifically regulated under DOT/ICC.

 

[City Driver]

Correct me if I speak out of turn here, but...

I do not believe the drug testing is upsetting to anyone because they might test positive. It is upsetting due to the erosion of civil liberties that the random testing represents.

I never hide heroin in the trunk of my car, either, but I'm not going to let someone search my car for no reason.

you might have personal things in the trunk of your car....what personal belongings are in your piss that you care that much about?


i think the whole invasion of privacy argument is stupid...it would be different if they made you piss in front of your center manager in his office and he had to hold your dick to make sure it was real

you piss in a cup in a private room and they check and see if you have done any illegal drugs lately

ups and any other company has the right to know that there employees are drug free so you wont show up high some day and do thousands of dollars of damage while on drugs

 

[dilligaf]

To clarify my last statement further, what pkg has are sups/oc's/mgr that use reasonable cause. That is by no means random. If fact I feel safe in saying that that can be highly prejudicial.

 

[Cementups]

I'm all for random drug testing. No drugs, no worries.

 

[UPSNewbie]

Livin the dream, I'd give a gallon to them, its not a violation of any civil liberty
I was hired on with the knowledge that testing occurs, and I was hired on with the
expectation of being drug free..

So by being hired you are volunteering to this practice.

1+

 

[UnconTROLLed]

I can name at least 8-9 supervisors I know as a fact are doing drugs before and after work ( if not during work). Where is their random testing, or even forced testing ?

I am all for testing, mandatory, AS LONG AS IT IS THE SAME FOR EVERYONE and we are all treated equally.

It is, IMO, an invasion of privacy when one person is selected for a "fit for duty" drug test UNLESS THEY WERE OBSERVED USING DRUGS OR THERE ARE OBVIOUS SIGNS (such as overwhelming scents, or cocaine snot running down their nose, etc).

If there are no streamlined methods for MANDATORY testing; ex certain company favorites are skipped over (like would be the case of course; UPS could never follow a contract or guideline that didn't help them) then there's no room for mandatory testing because it is done discriminatingly.

 

[old levi's]

Got no problem with it. Heck, I haven't even had a beer in the last 7 years.

 

[Jones]

The right of transportation companies to conduct random drug testing in compliance with federal regulations has been upheld in court (it was challenged on the grounds that it was an invasion of privacy), so any discussion we have here is moot and the following is just my opinion.
I don't like it, and it has nothing to do with my personal habits as I don't use illegal drugs, in fact I barely even drink anymore.
I don't like the idea that despite the fact that I've never been arrested, and never shown any signs of use/abuse, an outside entity should have the right to randomly and repeatedly test my urine just to make sure that I'm being a good boy. Using the same logic, the police should be allowed to randomly (and without a warrant) search peoples homes, just to make sure they're not running a meth lab or anything else illegal. And I can guarantee you that if that were the case, you would have people saying "What's the big deal? As long as you're clean you shouldn't have a problem with it. Meth labs are a growing concern in this country and the police have a right to know if you're running one in your house".
It's been observed by many that the erosion of civil liberties in an obstensibly free society almost never happens in a big, dramatic way. It happens bit by bit, a little here, a little there, and the whole way people are saying "Hey, it's no big deal because I'm not doing anything wrong so these new rules don't affect me.", " We need these rules to protect us from the bad people, and if you're not a bad person it shouldn't bother you.".

Risk is inherent in life, it's part of the human experience and you can't legislate it away. The only thing you can legislate away is your freedom, and we've been doing that at a steady pace since the ink dried on the Bill of Rights.
I read an article recently called 'They Hate Us Because of Our Freedom', and while I don't agree with everything the author says, he makes some very valid points.
In one way the people saying that random drug testing is no big deal are right. Considering everything we've already lost, it really is no big deal. In a big picture kind of way, peeing in a cup as a condition of your employment is just one more tiny link in the chain. Enjoy that freedom!

 

[trplnkl]

I said in another post that I had only one problem with the random drug testing. I now have to back track and amend that statement. Like many Americans today I overlooked the simplest equation to the question. The loss of civil liberties. The government, regardless of the little letter after their name, has slowly eroded our civil liberties for centuries and are still going after them. It's easy to think and say, " If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about", but is that really true. Today they can do random drug testing, tomorrow they may pass a law that you can't drink coffee and the random drug test can prove you to be guilty. There was a time in our relatively recent past that any citizen could own any gun they could pay for, today we have to jump through hoops to get a permit to protect ourselves in our own homes. bit by bit.

Jonesy, thank you for making me rethink.

 

[shrimpfire]

I was going to reply but all I can say is amen to trplnkl above me, Thats about as good as it can get I think.

 

[diesel96]

I think it's hypercritical sitting at your computer, drinking alcohol, smoking a cigarette, popping a zanax after eating a greasy fast food meal and a chocloate shake, and then, criticise a pot smoker. Besides the ridiculous amount of money the US spends on "The War on Drugs" (that's as useless as tits on a bull), as a stock holder with UPS, I detest funding another penny to any unwarranted additional random drug testing on non-CLD Class-A employees. Take note, Jones and Tex make strong arguments about Gov't and now Corperate slowly eroding our civil liberties,

 

[Livin the Dream?]

The right of transportation companies ....!

Excellent post. Link is very interesting as well.

 

[p400npaper]

Sucking the fluids out of my body without my consent seems to cross some line. Should every one who drives a car be subjected to pullovers and random fluid removal? They are just as much of a hazard on the road as I am, and I would argue more so. I dont do any drugs but the question is a much larger one than "I dont so I dont care" I do own guns but dont kill people with them but there is an element of America that belives I should lose the right to privicy in my home if I own them.

 

[trplnkl]

Sucking the fluids out of my body without my consent seems to cross some line. Should every one who drives a car be subjected to pullovers and random fluid removal? They are just as much of a hazard on the road as I am, and I would argue more so. I dont do any drugs but the question is a much larger one than "I dont so I dont care" I do own guns but dont kill people with them but there is an element of America that belives I should lose the right to privicy in my home if I own them.

Unfortunately, those "elements" are the ones running our country at the moment.

 

[p400npaper]

Nice to hear that the "Third largest state agrees". I didnt vote for them but did provide the VIP opposition.

 

[feeder53]

I will take the test anytime, and yes we have given up some of our freedoms. Has anyone thought of the cards your local supermaket give you to get a discount on your purchase........Did you ever wonder if they sell that info to anyone on your eating habits? What if Joe Snuffy buys a lot of beer and his insurance company gets that info and raises his rate????????......Just a thought.

 

[dilligaf]

This conversation has gone from commercial random drug testing to private random drug testing to gun rights. All civil liberties issues.(BTW-that was a good point I hadn't thought of either.) What about senior citizens and their right to drive? We all have had experiences with a senior who should not be driving (either personally(family) or publically). They are a hazard. Ya ya ya, I know they are not all dangerous but many of them are. AARP is one of the biggest lobbys in Washington and there will likely never be any restrictions set for mandatory driving tests for seniors. But............................ just thought I would throw it out there.

 

[Livin the Dream?]

This conversation has gone from commercial random drug testing to private random drug testing to gun rights. All civil liberties issues.(BTW-that was a good point I hadn't thought of either.) What about senior citizens and their right to drive? We all have had experiences with a senior who should not be driving (either personally(family) or publically). They are a hazard. Ya ya ya, I know they are not all dangerous but many of them are. AARP is one of the biggest lobbys in Washington and there will likely never be any restrictions set for mandatory driving tests for seniors. But............................ just thought I would throw it out there.

LOL - One of my pet peeves - I believe that, once someone hits 70 years of age, they should have to take a driving test daily. Medical exam as well.