Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sp0rAdiC
How does that make sense? What if an employer had a no-alcohol or no-tobacco policy, or just to create a point, no-dairy or no-sugar policy, and tested prior to employment for that? (hypothetically) All this is is the employer dictating what you can and cannot do when you are off the clock, completely on your own time. That seems as if the grasp is being extended a bit. Maybe in a case where housing and everything is provided, and you live on the employers campus or something, but other than that I don't think it's at all fair. Tobacco creates much more of an insurance risk, and alcohol is a much larger problem in the workplace and at home, so why is marijuana the bad guy?
I'm not saying it's ok to come to work high or drunk, because that would affect performance, but if you want to spark a joint at night and relax, why should that be looked at in such a different light as cracking open a cold beer?
|
The original point was to people trying to "fool" drug tests. People generally know, if they are going to be a cop, pilot, doctor, investment banker, or whatever, that their employer will be screening you for drugs - sometimes this is for statutory reasons and sometimes it is simply company policy.
The point is you know this when you begin working for them, and if you choose to accept the position knowing you will be drug tested and you plan to continue using drugs, then you are being dishonest. There's no nice way to say it, but there it is. If you don't want to be drug tested, work somewhere else, don't lie about it.
The only time I might have a bit of sympathy is when a person has been working for years at a place and then the firm starts drug testing out of nowhere for no real reason.