I worked for a US company in the past and in my contract there was a phrase that I'm going to paraphrase. "Can be sent to unannounced drug tests (US only)"
This isn't a worldwide issue.
this post was submitted on 21 Nov 2023
732 points (90.0% liked)
Unpopular Opinion
6415 readers
93 users here now
Welcome to the Unpopular Opinion community!
How voting works:
Vote the opposite of the norm.
If you agree that the opinion is unpopular give it an arrow up. If it's something that's widely accepted, give it an arrow down.
Guidelines:
Tag your post, if possible (not required)
- If your post is a "General" unpopular opinion, start the subject with [GENERAL].
- If it is a Lemmy-specific unpopular opinion, start it with [LEMMY].
Rules:
1. NO POLITICS
Politics is everywhere. Let's make this about [general] and [lemmy] - specific topics, and keep politics out of it.
2. Be civil.
Disagreements happen, but that doesn’t provide the right to personally attack others. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Please also refrain from gatekeeping others' opinions.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Shitposts and memes are allowed but...
Only until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.
5. No trolling.
This shouldn't need an explanation. If your post or comment is made just to get a rise with no real value, it will be removed. You do this too often, you will get a vacation to touch grass, away from this community for 1 or more days. Repeat offenses will result in a perma-ban.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://legal.lemmy.world/tos/
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
The fact any employee feels like it has the right to what I go after work is insane. This means drugs testing, second jobs, only-fans/ porn or anything similar.
load more comments
(6 replies)
Always thought they were ridiculous and intrusive. So long as you show up sober and do your job properly who the fuck cares what you do in your off time? I'm the director for a nonprofit. I'm a huge stoner and my boss (executive director) was a hippie back in the day lol. I love hearing her wild drug stories from the 70's and 80's lmao. I'm also pretty open with my employees about the fact that I smoke weed. Turns out most of them do too! I always come well dressed, usually in a suit with a clean haircut, so I love seeing their faces when I tell them I'm a pot head lmao
Anyway, my employees are all very hard workers and I can tell they enjoy working here. The fuck would I ruin that by drug testing?
What really blows my mind is that some employers in the US test for nicotine usage now and can deny you a job, or fire you for using a perfectly legal, non mentally impairing substance.
I applied to work for Discover and they told me about their policy. I told them to pound sand.
That's usually about health insurance. Keeps their premiums down if they offer health as a benefit. Doesn't make it right, but it is not a morality thing on the firm's part.
load more comments
(1 replies)
It's stupid because most jobs are so fucking dull and easy, being on drugs is the only way to get any stimulation at them.
All it does is punish addicts trying to get back on their feet. For anyone else, you can just get a drink to clear you out the day before or just pretend that your prescription medications are causing a false positive.
Does this community work like r/unpopularopinion where you're supposed to upvote if you disagree and downvote otherwise? I agree, but I'm not sure which action to take.
load more comments
(7 replies)
It's an insurance thing. Gotts have business insurance. Can't get that unless you can show that at least pretend to not have drug users working there. A drug test is the best way to show that effort.
The last job I worked at said they reserved the right to drug test at any time. Thankfully they never did, because I use cannabis to treat pain for a rare nerve disorder and I would be in pretty serious pain all the time if I didn't. But I was basically ready to stand up to them and say, "I'm not taking the test. I use cannabis. It's legal one state over, which is where I buy it. I don't get high when I'm working. If you want to fire me for it, have fun finding a new employee."
As drug use is nomalizing, I can understand that companies normalize drug tests, too. Even as a normal person I prefer jobs that require a certain level of precision or which could be dangerous when mistakes are made to be performed by people who are neither drunk nor high.
I don’t see how that follows. The point is a drug test is a personal invasion so there needs to be a good reason. Operating heavy machinery is a good reason. Where lives are at stake is a good reason. Where it can have an outsized financial or other impact may be a good reason.
However, for most people, I don’t see why it’s not just a matter of good job performance or not. Sure, companies may want to drug test everyone to keep them in line, but that’s not sufficient reason
Same. I was a cook in a casino restaurant (bear with me), and when I applied for the job the head chef asked me "can you pass a drug test?" I said "oh yeah, I don't do any dr-", he interrupts me to say "I didn't ask if you do any drugs, I asked if you can pass a drug test. Yes or no?"
Well, turns out 2 line cooks had heroin problems, the head chef, sous chef, and morning lead chef were functioning alcoholics, one general manager was coked out of his fucking mind 24/7 until the last few days before payday, the other was taking about 3x as much xanax as anyone should, and the wait staff smoked approximately as much as Snoop Dogg.
Needless to say, that place was the definition of a runaway clusterfuck. Much of their problems were caused by the rampant drug use amongst the employees that could have been prevented if they were a little more thorough with the drug tests, rather than literally giving me the pee cup to take home and bring back later.
Welcome to the service industry. The dish washer usually has the best hook up.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(2 replies)