Urine or your Out!

[Jack]

THE JOB - URINE TEST

(Whoever wrote this one deserves a HUGE pat on the back!)

Like most folks in this country, I have a job. I work, they pay me. I pay my taxes and the government distributes my taxes as it sees fit. In order to get that paycheck in my case, I am required to pass a random urine test(with which I have no problem). What I do have a problem with is the distribution of my taxes to people who don't have to pass a urine test. So, here is my Question: Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare check because I have to pass one to earn it for them? Please understand, I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet. I do, on the other hand, have a problem with helping someone sitting on their butt, doing drugs, while I work. . . . Can you imagine how much money each state would save if people had to pass a urine test to get a public assistance check? I guess we could title that program, 'Urine or You're Out'.

 

[Dave Wood]

I will accept part of the premise, but I wouldn't work anywhere that required a p!ss test. If I do my job well and have no issues, it is an unrealistic intrusion into my private business. Since it isn't a test to see if you are doing anything at that point in time it is really testing what you do on your own time. That would require them to pay me for my off time. While some may say, what's the big deal if your not doing anything wrong?? Well that's just the beginning. Once they get people used to testing for a job, they can gradually expand it to encompass any number of undesirable off work habits. Achoholism causes more deaths in this country than all illegal drugs combined. That will be the next thing.
I can agree with testing for people that are paid by monies collected from taxes, but that would include the Politicians,Teachers, Police,Military....I'll stop there because the list of people sucking on the teats of the public is longer than I have time to type. If you think any one of those positions somehow makes it a non issue, you don't know many people.
Then in a complete denial of the hypocracy, we subsidize drug companies to develop drugs to ..give us an erection, grow hair,calm our nerves, help our aches and pains as well as any number of other conditions of humanity.

 

[Jack Houpe]

Dave I guess your not a pilot or in the transportation business, I certainly would not want to fly with anyone behind the stick with a drug problem.

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

A number of firms in transport and other dangerous occupations require that you be willing to undertake random urine and breath tests.
I think that is O.K. if one is operating dangerous equipment or even driving a school bus. Imagine your kids being driven to school by an alcoholic or a drug addict. I think then most would favour testing.
As far as testing people receiving welfare goes the thought appeals to me, although I doubt it would ever happen.

 

[egoman/ Shawn Wedge]

Quite often when I travel for jobs a urine test is required. My biggest problem is the fact that they dont compensate you for your time . Thats right my time. I have better things to do than sit at a lab and wait for a drug test. While I am waiting I could be working in most cases and that never comes back to me. The pilots and drivers are usually getting paid during their tests, are they not ???
The welfare idea while promising wouldnt work anyways. I never have worked with as many drug addicts as I usually do on these CLEAN sites.
Novel idea but it wouldnt work anyways.

 

[Rick Muck- Mark IV]

Aor even driving a school bus. Imagine your kids being driven to school by an alcoholic or a drug addict.
.

Pete,

You mean like this one locally here?

School bus driver Martha Thompson gets jail time for drunken driving with kids onboard

 

[Howard Jones]

I have worked (35 years) in the transportation business (public commuter trains maintenance). I have also been a Union Rep on and off for more that 25 years and I can assure you that when we started drug testing about 15 years ago it very quickly weeded out the drug users. I am as certain as I can be that 99% plus of the at work drug problem has been eliminated completely. You just cannot do drugs and remain working. They always get caught and very quickly and then they always get fired and never get their jobs back. Gone on the first dirty test every time. The Union has given up fighting them if the test procedure was followed. Arbitrators have not cut anybody I know of any slack in this area of labor law for almost 20 plus years. Just doesn't happen.

The drug testing program is really an intelligence test. The dumb people don't stop doing drugs or start doing drugs, get random ed out, and are gone. A clean-smart new guy gets the job, stays clean and keeps it forever, story over. Sort of a Darwinian selection thing.

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

Pete,

You mean like this one locally here?

School bus driver Martha Thompson gets jail time for drunken driving with kids onboard

Yep just like her, but driving a school bus would drive me to drink I'm sure!
I liked the girl at the end of the clip comforting the little kid.

 

[Ron Earp]

Question: Shouldn't one have to pass a urine test to get a welfare

I've heard this one tossed about over the years in respect to welfare, unemployment, and so on. In general I think it is a good idea.

Does anyone know of any countries that use this requirement for their form of welfare/assistance/unemployment benefits?

 

[Bill Musarra]

In the Operating Room the rules are a little different. There are no random test, but if you get stuck by a needle or cut by careless handling of the scalpel, you have to submit to a drug test. Not to mention that unless you get permission of the patient to have him or her tested for aids or hepattitis etc., you get the lecture of safe sex for the next 6 months or so if they refuse. The different O Rs have implemented different techniques for eliminating these occurrences. Those of us in Anesthesia have to take them when our drug count comes up wrong or a syringe or ampule turns up missing. Sounds simple, but it happens. Most are harmless mistakes where a syringe is left in the coat pocket. Yeah we wear jackets in the O R. It is usually cold in there. The ventilation system is a positive pressure system that doesn't allow air from the hallway to enter the suite. Not to mention the surgeons and scrub techs are under the hot spot lights. Meanwhile, we are left standing up at the head trying to stay warm. Over the years I have learned a few tricks that help out.

Bill

 

[Mike]

Dave's objection to a job requiring a urine test is probably defensible. I think, however, that his premise (that what one does on his own time is his own business) is questionable, in that it supposes drugs lose their effect once one is NOT on his own time but working. Any position requiring clear headed decision making, whether controlling a public transport, making medical decisions/operations, signing bills in Congress/government that will affect the entire population or anything like this should require a drug free mind (alcohol is a drug too, methinks, but it's effects do dissipate over time...marijuana too? Since it's now legal in Calif.? Can't speak from experience)

 

[Scott Calabro]

As an FAA A&P with an Inspection Authorization, I am subject to mandatory random and post incident/accident drug testing.

I have no problem with it.

Our wrenches keep the skies safe.

 

[Cliff Beer]

I've heard this one tossed about over the years in respect to welfare, unemployment, and so on. In general I think it is a good idea.

Does anyone know of any countries that use this requirement for their form of welfare/assistance/unemployment benefits?

Ron, I don't know about other countries and drug testing as a pre-condition to rendering of social services, but most every other socialized country in the world requires as a pre-condition that the recipient belong in the country! In other words, if you're an illegal in just about any European country for example then not only are you denied social services of any kind, you're promptly deported.

Here in the US we seem to be OK with giving free medical services, public education services, a variety of social support services including housing and food stamps, to people who have never paid $1 of taxes, have criminal records, entered the country illegally, are on drugs, alcoholics, etc.......the list goes on. I just don't get it.

Apparently nobody in control of the entitlement decisions around these social hand outs has backbone enough to limit the scope such that the whole drill doesn't get watered down to be only very marginally helpful to the people who both need it the help, and deserve the help.

Simply amazing.