Drug Testing

[gogo]

There's a new clause in the contract that my union just negotiated that pretty much says no one can be discriminated against based on "parental status". Which works both ways; no one is going to be denied a promotion because they had to take a few extra sick days to stay home with their kids, but people without kids aren't going to be expected to spend more time traveling, for example. We'll see how that works out in actual practice...

[cryptique]

MattZ made the points I was going to make, but here's some of what I was thinking anyway.

 

Based on my admittedly limited empirical observation, people with children spend less time in the office, end up exhausting their sick/personal/vacation time much faster and therefore take more unpaid time off, and are less productive at work on the whole because issues with their kids come up surprisingly often. In the meantime, their childless coworkers (like me) are left with the short end of the stick, often staying late to finish things up because everyone else leaves and just assumes that we can do that extra work because we don't have kids to go home to.

 

Is this a completely unscientific set of observations? Am I just a little bitter about this stuff? You betcha. And I'm not trying to claim that this is the way it is everywhere. All I know is that as a childless person, I spend a hell of a lot more time at the office than anyone in my department who has kids, and I am far from a workaholic.

 

Factor in that as a single person I cost my employer a lot less for healthcare, and I seriously begin to question why workers with children would be more attractive to employers.

[jhc]

Alcohol stays in the system roughly 3-4 days after consumption, so those 3-4 beers Fri./Sat. night could do you in.

 

That's not true at all

[jhc]

if smoking a blunt is more important to you than having to take and keep a job, you may have a problem.

 

What if there were a long-term test for alcohol? Would you take a job that would fire you if they caught you having a few beers after work, or a glass of wine at dinner?

[Dude]

I'm considering writing a full blown rant on what seems to be an increasing trend of complaining about benefits for married/parents/attached to family,community,oroutsideworld employees, but I think I can succintly put it this way.

 

I've known plenty of fellow employee mothers who would devote long stretches of company time to micromanaging their kids' lives including long phone calls attempting to motivate them to do their homework, midafternoon trips to the school to pick sick kids up from the school nurse and the occasional argument with a disobedient son or daughter. The drag in productivity, which would also include other extraneous behavior like baby pools and other activities that went well beyond the usual water cooler stuff, is pretty significant.

[Dreamin']

There's a new clause in the contract that my union just negotiated that pretty much says no one can be discriminated against based on "parental status". Which works both ways; no one is going to be denied a promotion because they had to take a few extra sick days to stay home with their kids, but people without kids aren't going to be expected to spend more time traveling, for example. We'll see how that works out in actual practice...

Does the US have legislation that sets minimum employment standards for non-union employees? Here it's against the law to ask questions about family/parental status in a job interview (which from some of the comments in this thread I think is a very good thing) or to discriminate against an employee (usually a woman) on this basis. There are also regulations about hours of work and overtime that apply to everyone. If you're lucky enough to be in a union, the bar is often raised a little higher.

 

If an employee's work ethic and productivity is a problem (for whatever reason), the behaviour should be addressed. I also think it's a good idea to maintain healthy boundaries at work and try to avoid enabling a coworker who's slacking. I know that's sometimes easier said than done, but I just don't buy the "victim" thing.

[gogo]

Yes, Judy, there are wage and hour laws, at both the state and federal level. There's also the Family Medical Leave Act (thank you Bill Clinton), which primarily allows people to take unpaid time, and to know that their job will still be there when they come back from extended periods of time away for work, for family and medical issues (including childbirth and adoption). I'm not sure exactly which laws cover non-discrimination against mothers specifically, but I think EEO (equal employment opportunity) laws against discrimination on the basis of sex or gender would cover that. Probably a pretty hard thing to prove, though; I think having it in contract language will just provide another forum for addressing those issues.

[Dreamin']

I think having it in contract language will just provide another forum for addressing those issues.

I agree... and problems might be resolved more quickly (cheaply?) through a grievance.

[plasticeyeball]

our entire office staff has kids. no one doesn't. it makes for a "cover each other" over different periods of parenhood and age groups. it's just understood that someone with a 5 or 6 or 7 year old is going to be late on the 1st day of school or at some point going to have to leave to pick up a sick kid. everyone has done that when their turn came and it makes for a great environment. as a small company, the flexibility is attractive.

 

but this has nothing to do with dope smoking so.... on that note

 

 

Saw your van on the sand and I don't understand

Tell me why you do it cause you understand

Look at where you're goin before you go insane

Your pills and your booze and you're not the same

 

Dope smokin moron don't make me yawn

Dope smokin moron don't make me yawn

Dope smokin moron don't make me

Don't make me

Don't make me yawn

 

I keep thinking wonderin why you do it to yourself

You parents say you do it your way ???

You're cruisin, you're losin it on the side

Take this turn, keep doin it you're gonna die

 

Hey, Merle, I was wonderin'... if ya had any 'ludes on ya?

[MrRain422]

I think a dope smokers vs. parents battle royale is in order.

[Dreamin']

our entire office staff has kids. no one doesn't. it makes for a "cover each other" over different periods of parenhood and age groups. it's just understood that someone with a 5 or 6 or 7 year old is going to be late on the 1st day of school or at some point going to have to leave to pick up a sick kid. everyone has done that when their turn came and it makes for a great environment. as a small company, the flexibility is attractive.

Good point. And this can work well even if everyone doesn't have kids. For example, my male coworker (w/ kids) was almost always willing to cover for me when I wanted to do some "rock tourism" on short notice, etc.

[plasticeyeball]

with three, i always say work is much much easier than home

 

 

mommy's not home so i let them up too late already. it's story time and then

[bjorn_skurj]

I write better leads with a buzz on.

[plasticeyeball]

Most of my job, the accounting, the IT guy & HR guy crap are not that condusive but the drawing & design part seems to feel like it flows better.

 

But then again i would think that having had that same buzz on.

[bjorn_skurj]

Yeah, I can't be too buzzed because it makes it hard to type, but two cocktails depresses the inhibitions just enough so I come up with something a doink or two edgier and original.

[EL the Famous]

I've known plenty of fellow employee mothers who would devote long stretches of company time to micromanaging their kids' lives including long phone calls attempting to motivate them to do their homework, midafternoon trips to the school to pick sick kids up from the school nurse and the occasional argument with a disobedient son or daughter. The drag in productivity, which would also include other extraneous behavior like baby pools and other activities that went well beyond the usual water cooler stuff, is pretty significant.

 

If an employee's work ethic and productivity is a problem (for whatever reason), the behaviour should be addressed. I also think it's a good idea to maintain healthy boundaries at work and try to avoid enabling a coworker who's slacking. I know that's sometimes easier said than done, but I just don't buy the "victim" thing.

 

Most of my managers just have a policy of 'if the work gets done, i don't care how you structure your time to do it'. You don't, be that because you're focusing too much on your kids or whatever...you'll see the result in your performance review and resulting bonus.

 

Also, my guess is plenty of potential (and qualified) employees who have kids have been passed over for jobs because they are parents...part of me understands that, especially if the job involves being chained to your desk or, conversely, constant travel. If you decide to have kids, you do so w/ an understanding that may not allow you to focus on your career as much. So, I agree w/ Judy...this whole 'i'm being treated unfairly because I don't have kids' thing is weak. You could actually spin that into quicker promotions, etc, because you do have more time to devote to your job.

 

dude, the whole legal liability things is quite simple...while a DWI or other booze related incident can be just as bad as anything drug related, alcohol in and of itself is legal. plus, when we talk drug tests it's not just for pot and i know we can debate if heroin, etc. is any worse for you than booze.

[cryptique]

So, I agree w/ Judy...this whole 'i'm being treated unfairly because I don't have kids' thing is weak. You could actually spin that into quicker promotions, etc, because you do have more time to devote to your job.

It probably cuts both ways, and I think people on both sides of the issue (who actually care about it) get entrenched and defensive about their own positions, myself included.

 

On an everyday level, I see people with kids getting a lot more "benefits" -- in terms of schedule flexibility and getting to duck out when projects get hot -- that I simply don't get, and that's where my bubbling resentment comes from. Plus, my department doesn't really have a promotion path, so the idea that I'm more likely to get quicker promotions isn't really true -- I've already received the one promotion that any of us is ever likely to get (at least until my manager leaves, and most of us don't want her job). The vast majority of us are "senior writers" now, because that's basically as far as we can go. In a different environment with more promotion opportunities, maybe I'd feel differently.

 

It must be said that I don't really get all that wound up about this -- of all the issues in my work life that upset me in some way, this one's pretty minor.

[Dude]

dude, the whole legal liability things is quite simple...while a DWI or other booze related incident can be just as bad as anything drug related, alcohol in and of itself is legal. plus, when we talk drug tests it's not just for pot and i know we can debate if heroin, etc. is any worse for you than booze.

 

True... okay, I can see a justification for testing for heroin from the perspective that H addicts will be more likely to do something desperate to get their fix, including stealing from the company.

 

Most companies test for pot because of our current laws as you state, but I'm pretty confident pot will be legalized in some states in the next ten years. If brothels are legal in Nevada and gambling is legal in most states, it seems odd that cultivating and smoking a mostly benign plant is illegal.

[EL the Famous]

Most companies test for pot because of our current laws as you state, but I'm pretty confident pot will be legalized in some states in the next ten years. If brothels are legal in Nevada and gambling is legal in most states, it seems odd that cultivating and smoking a mostly benign plant is illegal.

 

I agree 100%.

[mountain bed]

Most companies test for pot because of our current laws as you state, but I'm pretty confident pot will be legalized in some states in the next ten years. If brothels are legal in Nevada and gambling is legal in most states, it seems odd that cultivating and smoking a mostly benign plant is illegal.

Someday soon I remember we thought for SURE decriminalization (at least) would happen back in the '70's...but then came the whole 'just say no,turn in your parents' b.s. I'm not as optimistic as you but there is still a small semblance of hope that this will eventually happen before we're all in wheelchairs!

[MattZ]

it seems odd that cultivating and smoking a mostly benign plant is illegal.

 

I dont disagree with you, but I am not as optimistic... Heroin and cocaine also come from plants. So now we are splitting hairs over which plants and which drugs are benign and which ones arent. Or which ones are "mostly" benign as you put it. You are preaching to the choir with me, but I think a large portion of the population does not distinguish. And they will argue its a slippery slope. And maybe it is a slippery slope.

[bjorn_skurj]

I hate to rain on the parade, but I don't see any drug legalization coming down the path anytime soon. Just as there's a military-industrial complex, there's a "law enforcement-incarceration complex," a multibillion-dollar industry built around arresting, convicting and imprisoning people. To legalize drugs - which would cut arrests probably by a third or more - would cost a lot of people a lot of money. Call me a cynic, but I think for that reason alone, we're still going to have to put up with drug laws.

[Dreamin']

Even if drugs aren't legal, pre-employment alcohol and drug testing could be viewed as a human rights issue.

 

Canadian Human Rights Policy on Alcohol and Drug Testing

(This summary is from 2002, but I couldn't find anything more recent, so perhaps not much has changed.)

 

The Canadian Human Rights Act prohibits discrimination on the basis of disability and perceived disability. Disability includes those with a previous or existing dependence on alcohol or a drug. Perceived disability may include an employer

[M. (hristine]

I agree with bjorn.

 

I also think that cultivators of pot (and we're talking a mostly domestic product now) would not be interested in legalization. There is huge black market money in growing high quality weed. And it's not rocket science. One just has to be willing to take the risk.

 

I'll bet with the rise of meth labs, the DEA has less manpower to sniff it out, too.

[mountain bed]

To legalize drugs - which would cut arrests probably by a third or more - would cost a lot of people a lot of money.

True...but it sickens me to think that the prison system is so overcrowded because of weed smokers & the like..so frickin' pedophiles get let out early to go about their dastardly deeds And speaking just in terms of 'addiction',evidently pedophilia must be like heroin or crack or something.The recidivism rate is off the scale.