Drug testing

[scarby]

I subcontract to a large utilities firm who are introducing drug and alcohol testing. Initially we will all be tested by swab in the mouth and swab taken from the sweat glands around the forehead, and then breathalised. Once that has been done we will be selected at random for future tests.

Now, not that I've got anything to hide because the sniff days are gone and I hardly drink at all now, but I'm a bit peeved about it all and think its an invasion of privacy. Has any one else had to go through this at work, or know of any legalities on the matter because I'm in two minds whether to refuse.


Or shall I shop being a wuss and get on with it!

 

[Hastings woody]

If you've nothing to hide. Why worrie.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

That's a disgrace in my opinion

 

[Garage_Doors]

That's a disgrace in my opinion

Why? Drink and drugs have no place at work.

 

[Garage_Doors]

That's a disgrace in my opinion

Why? Drink and drugs have no place at work.

 

[junior]

Do you mind saying what company? I have 2 Drug Detection dogs and can screen all employees entering the building and carry out random searches of offices/lockers/personal effects etc. I charge £35 per hour and a lot cheaper and less intrusive than their current plans I would imagine.

 

[scarby]

Why? Drink and drugs have no place at work.

Totally agree, and agree it should take place if a major incident takes place were there is some kind of human error that could have been caused by the influence of drink or drugs but to assume that you might be taking them before hand somehow doesn't sit right with me.

 

[Stumpy Tim]

Why? Drink and drugs have no place at work.

Because some drugs will stay in the system for days but have no affect whatsoever on an employee's work.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

Yup. As a City-based firm everyone gets a drug test when they start - i'm not aware if they can do random ones after, i didn't look for it in my contract.

I was advised to tick the box for possible opiates as at the time i used to eat a cake from Pret that had poppy sEeds and that might show up as a positive.

 

[scarby]

Do you mind saying what company? I have 2 Drug Detection dogs and can screen all employees entering the building and carry out random searches of offices/lockers/personal effects etc. I charge £35 per hour and a lot cheaper and less intrusive than their current plans I would

I'm not going to name the company, but I'm based up in the midlands anyway.
I do think they contract to some water companies down your way thou.

 

[Garage_Doors]

Because some drugs will stay in the system for days but have no affect whatsoever on an employee's work.

If drugs are in the system then they must be having some effect?

Also whether they are, or are not having an effect on the employees performance at work, this may be immaterial as the company does not want to employ a person who is a drug user.
As an employer I certainly would not want to employ such a person.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Because some drugs will stay in the system for days but have no affect whatsoever on an employee's work.

days? It can be weeks actually. If you're flying a plane or something then fine but anything else is a gross invasion of privacy in my opinion and serves little meaningful purpose.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

If drugs are in the system then they must be having some effect?

Not the case.

 

[Woodchip]

days? It can be weeks actually. If you're flying a plane or something then fine but anything else is a gross invasion of privacy in my opinion and serves little meaningful purpose.

So you wouldn't mind someone playing in a sub-station while off their nut on speed?

 

[Stumpy Tim]

So you wouldn't mind someone playing in a sub-station while off their nut on speed?

There's a difference between off their nut and having done something three days before.

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

So you wouldn't mind someone playing in a sub-station while off their nut on speed?

Clearly not. If someone is 'off their nut on speed', or drowsy through lack of sleep or not alert due to illness or hung over or maybe just wants to exert some good old plain maliciousness and cause a catastrophe then I would expect mechanisms/processes other than an occasional random drug test to be in place to try and pick it up. Wouldnt you?

 

[ifuhatepalacestandup]

If drugs are in the system then they must be having some effect?

Also whether they are, or are not having an effect on the employees performance at work, this may be immaterial as the company does not want to employ a person who is a drug user.
As an employer I certainly would not want to employ such a person.

If your company has ten employees or more under 30 I can almost guarantee you already are

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

So you wouldn't mind someone playing in a sub-station while off their nut on speed?

The bottom line is that they really do serve little purpose and there are better ways to prevent issues in the work place. In fact, in some cases drug testing has actually caused problems. I read an article a number of years ago about random testing in prisons which moved prisoners from marajuana which stays in the system for a long time and therefore has a high chance of detection onto harder drugs which are out a lot quicker and therefore have a lesser chance of detection.

 

[markw]

We get tested on the railway, never been random tested but tested at every medical and 1 incident where everyone involved was tested.

 

[Garage_Doors]

If your company has ten employees or more under 30 I can almost guarantee you already are

That implies you can guarantee that 1 in 10 people under 30 is taking illegal drugs
That is a very big claim.