- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Is company drug testing a human rights violation?
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:09 pm
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:09 pm
Because apparently in Canada they think so. At least at places that are not "safety sensitive".
LINK
LINK
quote:
It is especially challenging to justify drug and alcohol testing in workplaces that may not be considered “safety-sensitive”. Pre-employment drug and alcohol testing in a non-safety-sensitive workplace is not likely to be justifiable. Random drug and alcohol testing in non-safety-sensitive workplaces is essentially prohibited, though random testing might be implemented for an individual employee who returns to work after treatment for substance abuse or who agrees to random testing in connection with a workplace accommodation related to a substance abuse treatment program.
This post was edited on 11/18/17 at 5:21 pm
9
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:10 pm to tiggerthetooth
Canada is becoming a European hellhole
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:16 pm to rmnldr
quote:
Canada is becoming a European hellhole
Its a bold strategy. Lets see how it works out for them.
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:17 pm to tiggerthetooth
No dipshit
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:18 pm to tiggerthetooth
Is there a link or anything for this?
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:19 pm to rmnldr
quote:
Canada is becoming a European hellhole
No doubt Canada and Western Europe are terrible places to live. So glad I live in West Monroe.
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:19 pm to High C
quote:
Is there a link or anything for this?
Check OP.
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:20 pm to pbro62
quote:
No dipshit
quote:
pbro62
I don't think you understand how this forum stuff works. Take a break, then come back and try again.
TIA
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:22 pm to tiggerthetooth
Now someone has to clearly define "safety sensitive".
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:24 pm to High C
quote:
Now someone has to clearly define "safety sensitive".
LINK
quote:
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’s perception that a person’s use of alcohol or drugs makes him or her unfit to work.
So drug use is a "disability".
Anyways,
quote:
1A safety-sensitive job is one in which incapacity due to drug or alcohol impairment could result in direct and significant risk of injury to the employee, others or the environment. Whether a job can be categorized as safety-sensitive must be considered within the context of the industry, the particular workplace, and an employee’s direct involvement in a high-risk operation. Any definition must take into account the role of properly trained supervisors and the checks and balances present in the workplace.
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:49 pm to tiggerthetooth
Random drug screens are bullshite
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:58 pm to upgrayedd
quote:
Random drug screens are bullshite
One of the nice things about working in California is they don't allow randoms in most cases, only post incident.
It's also cool when they tell you at orientation on a job that the contractor doesn't do pre-employment screens as company policy.
If I can have a few beers last night and be good to work, I should be able to smoke a bowl with them, and not be worried about my job the next day.
All that random drug testing is is another way to put liability on the employees.
This post was edited on 11/18/17 at 5:59 pm
Posted on 11/18/17 at 5:59 pm to tiggerthetooth
quote:
It is especially challenging to justify drug and alcohol testing in workplaces that may not be considered “safety-sensitive”. Pre-employment drug and alcohol testing in a non-safety-sensitive workplace is not likely to be justifiable.
A lot of things aren't justifiable and we do them. Employers should be able to test who they choose as a condition of employment though
Posted on 11/18/17 at 6:01 pm to Sayre
quote:
If I can have a few beers last night and be good to work, I should be able to smoke a bowl with them, and not be worried about my job the next day.
Exactly like a MF
Posted on 11/18/17 at 6:10 pm to Sayre
quote:
If I can have a few beers last night and be good to work, I should be able to smoke a bowl with them, and not be worried about my job the next day.
All that random drug testing is is another way to put liability on the employees.
But dont drug tests test for more than just marijuana? What if someone is using cocaine, heroin, PCP, or LSD? Or opioids? Are those okay?
Posted on 11/18/17 at 6:23 pm to tiggerthetooth
Screw a dope head or drunk on any job. 
Posted on 11/18/17 at 6:26 pm to tiggerthetooth
quote:
What if someone is using cocaine, heroin, PCP, or LSD? Or opioids? Are those okay?
As long as you're not doing that crap on the job, I don't care what you choose to do on your own time to your own body with your own money. It's none of mine ore anybody else's business.
Posted on 11/18/17 at 6:26 pm to rmnldr
quote:
Canada is becoming a European hellhole
There was a lot of similar debate in this country when drug testing started to become common. Though it was more framed as an invasion of privacy issue.
Posted on 11/18/17 at 6:27 pm to fishfighter
quote:
Screw a dope head or drunk on any job.
Having a few drinks in the evening doesn't make someone a drunk. Neither does smoking a bowl or two make someone a dope head.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News