NYT: "Economy Needs Workers, but Drug Tests Take a Toll"

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by A.Goldberg, Aug 10, 2017.

  1. A.Goldberg, Aug 10, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2017

    A.Goldberg macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #1
    Interesting article from the NYT, especially considering Trumps push to increase US manufacturing. It's a couple weeks old but worth the read. 25%-40%+ of manufacturing applicants ineligible for the job due to drug use is pretty astounding.

    https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile...iness/economy/drug-test-labor-hiring.amp.html

    I suggest reading the entire article, but here's the big points.
     
  2. darksithpro macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2016
    #2
    Cause and effect. Where are most of the drugs coming from? Perhaps Mexico and Columbia? Doesn't Trump want to build a wall to slow down the influx of narcotics? However weed is also grown in the US as well...
     
  3. DrewDaHilp1, Aug 10, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2017

    DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #3
    I think a lot of people lost hope and turned to drugs. I'm not saying it's a proper excuse.

    ETA: The one lady mentions that 4 out of 10(typo fix) fail. That still leaves her with 60% to choose from or from them to choose her(employment works both ways). Perhaps she should raise the wages.
     
  4. NT1440 macrumors G4

    NT1440

    Joined:
    May 18, 2008
  5. localoid macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
  6. Bug-Creator macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #6
    Hmmm, low math skills or part of that other "40%"? :p
     
  7. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #7
    Well, in this case, drug tests are a little unfair (from the implication that it's primarily weed). Pot stays in your system a long time, whereas alcohol and cocaine and others are gone quickly. So if you use weed recreationally on your own time (not at work) you can still test positive...
     
  8. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #8
    Cause and effect? I think you mean personal responsibility. Nobody forced them to stick a needle in their arm. And why should the rest of society who aren't drug addicts bear the cost of building a wall? We need to start drug testing these people in order to get their welfare check too. That'll teach these lazy dope fiends to put down the needle and go get a job.
     
  9. blackfox macrumors 65816

    blackfox

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2003
    Location:
    PDX
    #9
    That's been tried. It was very expensive and very few welfare recipients tested positive...
     
  10. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #10
    More liberal lies and fake news!
     
  11. DearthnVader macrumors 6502

    DearthnVader

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2015
    Location:
    Red Springs, NC
    #11
    I can think of 537 people in Washington DC that need to be drug tested.:p
     
  12. A.Goldberg thread starter macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #12
    A lot of companies test for alcohol as well these days. Whether or not a business chooses to ignore a substance use/abuse problem or not with an active employee I suppose is up to the employer. But having a drug user on staff is a liability (not only to the business but also their insurer)- especially when it comes to something like manufacturing where productivity and safety are paramount.

    Absolutely, there isn't a easy or reliable way of determining acute marijuana use. Whoever invents that technology will become a zillionaire. I suppose if you can't stop using pot for a month to get a job, that might be an indicator of problem. Alcohol aside, I suppose someone could test positive for coke on a Tuesday "I only use coke on the weekends", but we all know that excuse would never fly.

    More and more companies are utilizing hair tests for pre-employment testing, which does level the playing field so to speak between substances.

    They tried this, it didn't give the results you are expecting. 1. You can't assume everyone on welfare is using drugs- plenty of people not on welfare have drug issues too. 2. Tests can be cheated fairly easily. 3. Drug testing can get very expensive very quickly, especially when you get into things like hair tests and blood. 4. Denying welfare to drug users or addicts probably wouldn't help them as much as you think it might enable them. It may have unexpected consequences- i.e. Driving up crime rates.
     
  13. Herdfan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    #13
    If the drug testing is simply pre-employment testing, then it is not a drug test, it is a stupidity test. And people are failing it. Not sure I would want them working for me based on that alone.
     
  14. niploteksi macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    #14
    When he's perfected his transparent wall technique you can do houses with the same material so no one can grow weed at home!
     
  15. s2mikey macrumors 68020

    s2mikey

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2013
    Location:
    Upstate, NY
    #15
    Yep - Drug tests are really marijuana tests. And weed is a plant, not a drug. Recreational use has absolutely, positively NO effect on job performance whatsoever. Its the stupidest thing ever. Its like two quick tokes off of a doobie with friends and two weeks later ou fail a !@#$% drug test? Really? Companies dont pay workers a goody-goody stipend for weekend behavior. Its NONE of their business what people do on their own time. None.

    Drug tests should ONLY check to see if you are under the influence when you come to work.
     
  16. Plutonius macrumors 604

    Plutonius

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    New Hampshire
    #16
    The people who failed the drug test should not complain. They made their choice.
     
  17. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #17
    Typo
     
  18. yaxomoxay macrumors 68020

    yaxomoxay

    Joined:
    Mar 3, 2010
    Location:
    Texas
    #18
    Source? I am seriously interested in this.
    I read a slightly different thing on a slightly different topic:
    - welfare recipients (=poor) without s job: destructive behavior, even at the risk of losing help.
    - welfare recipients (=poor) with a low paying job, good non destructive behavior and often slightly increased upward mobility
     
  19. alex2792 Suspended

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2009
    #19
    It’s called personal responsibility. I would support legalizing all drugs, because the drug war is a giant waste of time and money, but at some point people need to take responsibility for their actions. It seems like these people have a pretty simple choice to make, either continue using drugs while collecting welfare or stop using drugs and get a job, and many go with the latter. Perpetually lowering the bar of entry in the name of fairness isn’t always the best solution.
     
  20. vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #20
    All true.

    But responsibility is a two-way street. And frankly, many (but certainly not all) companies fail in their responsibilities to their employees, to the people who breathe the air and drink the water near their facilities, and to their customers.

    We in the United States have a health-care system that is built around the notion of employer-paid health insurance. And yet how many companies refuse to provide this benefit to the employees? Hasn't this employer failed in its responsibilities? What about the mining companies that pollute the environment, that take short-cuts with the health and safety of their employees?

    Yeah: I think it is a trifle sad that so many people are unable to pass a marijuana-use test. But I think its' far more tragic that so many American executivse think that the notion of free-enterprise gives them the right to abuse their stockholders, their employees, their customers, and the planet itself.
     
  21. niploteksi, Aug 11, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2017

    niploteksi macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2016
    #21
    Do they take any body hair or is shaving your head enough?

    Unless you are a real addict with real problems, just not taking drugs prior to a job interview shouldn't be that much of a problem.
     
  22. A.Goldberg thread starter macrumors 68020

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #22
    They go for the head. If your head is shaved then they go elsewhere. I think for employment testing they' only can look back "3 months" to make things fair between men and women.
     
  23. DrewDaHilp1 macrumors 6502a

    DrewDaHilp1

    Joined:
    Mar 29, 2009
    Location:
    All Your Memes Are Belong to US
    #23
    Isn't no hair = failure?
     
  24. Herdfan macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    #24
    I'm not quite sure I would go for full legalization, especially for some of the stuff that can kill you (heroin, fentanyl, meth), but I would be all for decriminalization. Get caught with personal amounts, it just gets taken away and you pay a fine. Now trafficking or distribution is another story.

    But no you shouldn't have a criminal record because you got busted with a joint as a teen.
     
  25. vrDrew, Aug 11, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 11, 2017

    vrDrew macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    Location:
    Midlife, Midwest
    #25
    As a corollary to the NYT article, maybe we need to examine another employment-related story making the rounds. The risible San Francisco biotech entrepreneurs who posted a Craigslist ad for a personal assistant.

    And so much more. For fifteen to twenty-five bucks an hour (literally an unlivable wage in San Francisco) these jokers are expecting to hire what one commenter suggested was the combination of Jason Bourne and Mary Poppins.

    There are a lot of ****** jobs out there. Should we be surprised if a lot of people aren't that interested in them?
     

Share This Page