workplace drug tests

Message

slickliner6 · #31 Post by **slickliner6** » Fri Dec 19, 2014 3:25 pm

mangocrazy wrote:Hmmm, it's all getting a bit fraught in here. I'd make the following observations:

1. If your contract states that random drug tests can and will take place, you know exactly what you're signing up for and there can be no excuses or get-out clauses if you take the job.

2. If you're the boss of a small company and run a tight ship (as you have every right to), then your word goes, and you can choose employees with a similar/reciprocal attitude to yours.

However if the company that you work for tries to spring a random drugs test on you when such an eventuality is not in your contract, then you have every right to refuse.

Agreed

lazarus · #32 Post by **lazarus** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 4:29 pm

mangocrazy wrote:
I know what the response will be from certain sections; 'if it's your job that's at stake, don't do the crime'. But the point still remains that people have a right to do what they want to in their own time, as long as it doesn't impinge on their work performance. Drug testing, by its very nature, blurs that line to an unacceptable degree.

Well you have just seen a city type lose his job for fare dodging in his own time. Whats more he has lost his job for life. Yet there was a positive lynch mob condemning him presumable for the usual reasons - hemakes a lot of money / lives in a big house etc.

mangocrazy wrote:+1 old git. I really can't stand sanctimony in any of its forms. I'm certain that (for example) the Banks don't test their dealing room traders for cocaine (even though its use is endemic in the City), because they're making them loadsamoney. But the poor factory worker can't have a relaxing spliff at the end of the day or he gets the sack. One law for the rich, another for the poor.

As you can see from the above Mango.

fatboy · #33 Post by **fatboy** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 6:55 pm

And your point is......?

zoidberg · #34 Post by **zoidberg** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 7:03 pm

Taking co-codamol resulted in a colleagues suspension for two weeks after failing a drugs test. It showed a positive for opietes After a further test it was revealed as over the counter co-codamol. Still rubbish as it goes down on his file etc

#35 Post by **mangocrazy** » Sat Dec 20, 2014 8:14 pm

lazarus wrote:
mangocrazy wrote:
I know what the response will be from certain sections; 'if it's your job that's at stake, don't do the crime'. But the point still remains that people have a right to do what they want to in their own time, as long as it doesn't impinge on their work performance. Drug testing, by its very nature, blurs that line to an unacceptable degree.
Well you have just seen a city type lose his job for fare dodging in his own time. Whats more he has lost his job for life. Yet there was a positive lynch mob condemning him presumable for the usual reasons - hemakes a lot of money / lives in a big house etc.

mangocrazy wrote:+1 old git. I really can't stand sanctimony in any of its forms. I'm certain that (for example) the Banks don't test their dealing room traders for cocaine (even though its use is endemic in the City), because they're making them loadsamoney. But the poor factory worker can't have a relaxing spliff at the end of the day or he gets the sack. One law for the rich, another for the poor.
As you can see from the above Mango.

I'd echo fatboy's comment. You haven't addressed either of the points made in the quoted sections. All you've done is to give an unrelated example; we aren't discussing fare-dodging, we're discussing workplace drug testing.

fatboy · #36 Post by **fatboy** » Sun Dec 21, 2014 7:21 pm

The day of reckoning was Friday, the guy was fired with immediate effect.
I'm inclined to believe him when he said he did not use speed,he simply does not fit the profile, no problems getting his job done, no repeated mondays off because of weekend excess.
We were told it was a massive,massive fail so I fail to understand how he could function after that amount of consumption ( I'm a former addict so I bear the scars and know the signs)
I stated that X is willing to submit to any form of retest including blood or hair,at any time,that would re introduce the random factor.
I was simply sneered at.
Conclusion... A set up or a mix up of samples.
So after 10 years, service we are not prepared to listen to the possibility of a mistake on our or our contractors part

lazarus · #37 Post by **lazarus** » Sun Dec 21, 2014 9:06 pm

zoidberg wrote:Taking co-codamol resulted in a colleagues suspension for two weeks after failing a drugs test. It showed a positive for opietes After a further test it was revealed as over the counter co-codamol. Still rubbish as it goes down on his file etc

codeine is an opiate. but if the test is ringing alarm bells for an over the counter pain killerlike codeine then its a rubbish test and should not be used. using it will only cause aggro and problems.

fatboy wrote: Is it fair that you lose your job because the antibiotics/antidepressants you are on have given a false marker for coke or speed but you had no idea that any of this bullshit could happen because your doctor is helping you ?
Not very good at all is it ?

I wouldnt use the word fair. I'd say it was crap management, asking for a workplace to become a union hotbed if you treat your staff like that.

BikerGran · #38 Post by **BikerGran** » Sun Dec 21, 2014 9:41 pm

fatboy wrote:The day of reckoning was Friday, the guy was fired with immediate effect.
I'm inclined to believe him when he said he did not use speed,he simply does not fit the profile, no problems getting his job done, no repeated mondays off because of weekend excess.
We were told it was a massive,massive fail so I fail to understand how he could function after that amount of consumption ( I'm a former addict so I bear the scars and know the signs)
I stated that X is willing to submit to any form of retest including blood or hair,at any time,that would re introduce the random factor.
I was simply sneered at.
Conclusion... A set up or a mix up of samples.
So after 10 years, service we are not prepared to listen to the possibility of a mistake on our or our contractors part

Sounds like they wanted him out, for whatever reason. Not good.

zoidberg · #39 Post by **zoidberg** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 8:07 am

lazarus wrote:
zoidberg wrote:Taking co-codamol resulted in a colleagues suspension for two weeks after failing a drugs test. It showed a positive for opietes After a further test it was revealed as over the counter co-codamol. Still rubbish as it goes down on his file etc
codeine is an opiate. but if the test is ringing alarm bells for an over the counter pain killerlike codeine then its a rubbish test and should not be used. using it will only cause aggro and problems.

That's the initial test that is used on site, the further test is sent to a lab for ful analysis.

Still poop though when innocent being put on 'leave' while they carry out the tests.

lazarus · #40 Post by **lazarus** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:54 am

they are still storing up trouble for themselves if they operate like that. Macho management.

fatboy · #41 Post by **fatboy** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 7:34 pm

I have a meeting with management tomorrow, I'll be asking that they use testing with immediate on site results, followed by an immediate thereafter blood test in the event of any doubt as to toxicology levels.
This seems entirely reasonable to me, eliminates human error or foul play

Aladinsaneuk · #42 Post by **Aladinsaneuk** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:28 pm

depending on exactly what tests are being used - then a positive opid result is always likely to happen if some one has regularly taken codeine in any form

(You are aware that many cough medicines have it?? and you will be amazed when you find where traces of morphine are - a well known over the counter gastric medication for one.....)

I would advise your member to offer - and you must take and seal - a long length of hair - its unusual - it tracks exposure over its length.... and may well be key to this. I would also suggest that your member approached his GP and arranges for a full toxicity set of bloods to be taken asap - again blood has an interesting (half) life and could be crucial

one final thing - and this is important - ask him/her if they have something to confide - I have known many people who use drugs recreationally - right up to lsd and billy - who function perfectly well...

Aladinsaneuk · #43 Post by **Aladinsaneuk** » Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:30 pm

depending on exactly what tests are being used - then a positive opid result is always likely to happen if some one has regularly taken codeine in any form

(You are aware that many cough medicines have it?? and you will be amazed when you find where traces of morphine are - a well known over the counter gastric medication for one.....)

I would advise your member to offer - and you must take and seal - a long length of hair - its unusual - it tracks exposure over its length.... and may well be key to this. I would also suggest that your member approached his GP and arranges for a full toxicity set of bloods to be taken asap - again blood has an interesting (half) life and could be crucial

one final thing - and this is important - ask him/her if they have something to confide - I have known many people who use drugs recreationally - right up to lsd and billy - who function perfectly well...

nicketynoo · #44 Post by **nicketynoo** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 11:24 am

Aladinsaneuk wrote:
I would advise your member to offer - and you must take and seal - a long length of hair ..

I recommend this is the only test used ,as it probably rules out half of us on here

Unless of course they can get equal results from anal hair , then we'd all be plucked!

Aladinsaneuk · #45 Post by **Aladinsaneuk** » Tue Dec 23, 2014 7:48 pm

but I heard you waxed back, crack and sack nick?