Random Drug Testing

[Emergent]

What do you think of it? The new for profit owners of one of the hospitals I work for is doing it. The staff nurses are exempt because of the union contract. I was talking to one of the house supervisors, they aren't included in the contract, and she's been tested 3 times.

That sounds excessive, since this company has only been in charge a little over a year. A lot of nurses have been leaving, since the company is also obnoxious in many other ways, and the hospital is just getting difficult to work for all around due to decreased staffing, micro managing, general increased disorganization, etc.

I don't mind drug testing if someone seems impaired, but this random drug testing seems demeaning and a waste of resources, especially after someone has tested negative.

Thoughts?

[toomuchbaloney]

It doesn't bother me...then again, I don't have anything to hide. If they want to spend the resources randomly testing me, then so be it.

Yup

We freely give up our personal freedoms because "I've got nothing to hide". That is how it starts, but the loss of individual rights and freedoms never stops there.

The issue is not whether we have something to hide, it is whether or not we have a right to privacy from our corporate masters or political leaders. Every time someone simply rolls over and allows an invasion of privacy because they personally "have nothing to hide or fear" the message is sent that individual rights only matter to the individual, not to the society and certainly not to the government.

The increasing control and regulation of individual liberties and rights is a creeping fascism, in my view.

[Guest219794]

I am essentially a libertarian, so I do not approve of this sort of testing.

I believe in testing for cause. I have seen too many good nurses lose their employment and even their licenses because they dropped dirty for marijuana even though they had NEVER been impaired at work. I have also worked with too many nurses who were so hung over on Monday morning that they could barely complete the tasks necessary for their jobs.

I think that mandatory "drug" testing for employment is a violation of our rights although the court system doesn't see it that way. I would bet, however, if legislators or justices had to submit to themandatory and random testing that the laws would change to exempt them and other "special" people.

The "war on drugs" needs to stop. We cannot afford the casualties any longer.

Libertarian ideology supports the rights of an entity to act in its own interests, free from government interference. In this case the hospital believes its interests are best protected by doing drug tests. As a free citizen, I can choose whether or not to work for them. Nothing in this relationship goes against Libertarian philosophy. As a Libertarian you can't really advocate that the government interfere in private affairs by by regulating the practice.

This is not a matter of rights and liberties. You have a right to choose your employers, and the liberty to violate their policies or the law. It's just that thee might be consequences for your actions.

Our corporate masters have every right to interject their sensibilities about what we are allowed to do on our free/unpaid time away from the workplace.

I don't have corporate masters- I have a job. A job which I am free to leave at any time.

The argument that an employer has no right to to allow off duty activities to be a consideration just doesn't hold water. It is ridiculous that marijuana is illegal. But it is illegal, and it is not unreasonable for the hospital to not employ only people who abstain from illegal drug use. I expect school bus companies and airlines to do the same.

Should companies be in the position to decide which illegal drugs are acceptable? Or should active IV heroin users have access to the Pyxis? I am well aware that Marijuana and IV heroin are worlds apart, but there are are million drugs in between the two, and it is not the role of the employer to evaluate the acceptability of each.

The increasing control and regulation of individual liberties and rights is a creeping fascism, in my view.

Fascism is a a system of government. Implying that random drug testing by a hospital is in any way related to fascism is a bit over the top.

What individual liberty and rights are infringed on when an employer mandates drug tests?

The division between private behavior and employment is not absolute, and nor should it be. I have a Commercial Driving License that allows me to drive a bus with passengers. If I get a DWI or reckless driving ticket, I can't argue that that is my personal life, and that I would never do such a thing with passengers. When they fire me, they are not interfering with my rights or liberties, they are asserting their right to employ who they see fit.

I work with plenty of people- docs and nurses who use recreational drugs. I trust them completely, and what they do on their own time has no bearing on my assessment of their competence I just hung out with two old friends who smoke pot. One is a firefighter, one is a teacher. They are apparently not subject to drug testing. I am. It might have been nice to join them, but I don't do illegal drugs because I could lose my job. If smoking pot was important to me, I would get another job.

[BsumerRN]

Is anybody randomly testing physicians or residents?

[NOADLS]

Is anybody randomly testing physicians or residents?

It's okay, you can trust that they're clean. But those nurses...

[jadelpn, LPN, EMT-B]

There are so many strange things that can turn a test into a positive that doesn't mean someone has used illegal drugs.

It is along with ageism (get paid too much), demanding higher and higher levels of education (a masters for entry level bedside position at 25 bucks and hour), plus testing for smoking cigarettes, (or using any nicotine products) , there are nurses who have chronic pain that they medicate legally for (non-narcotics can come up positive too), food products that come back as a positive, or even someone who went out the night before and had a few drinks--all sorts of things.

Bottom line, instead of just saying "we are gonna pick you off one by one so that we can hire at a highly reduced rate, get rid of that pesky union thing, and grow a bunch of our own in our own image" they have to destroy careers in the process.

[Cola89]

It does seem to be a little obnoxious and excessive. I don't mind being tested because I don't do drugs, but I would mind being micromanaged and mistrusted over and over.

[Cola89]

Is anybody randomly testing physicians or residents?

Or how about PAs and NPs?? Or CRNAs?

[toomuchbaloney]

Libertarian ideology supports the rights of an entity to act in its own interests, free from government interference. In this case the hospital believes its interests are best protected by doing drug tests. As a free citizen, I can choose whether or not to work for them. Nothing in this relationship goes against Libertarian philosophy. As a Libertarian you can't really advocate that the government interfere in private affairs by by regulating the practice.

This is not a matter of rights and liberties. You have a right to choose your employers, and the liberty to violate their policies or the law. It's just that thee might be consequences for your actions.

Our corporate masters have every right to interject their sensibilities about what we are allowed to do on our free/unpaid time away from the workplace.

I don't have corporate masters- I have a job. A job which I am free to leave at any time.

The argument that an employer has no right to to allow off duty activities to be a consideration just doesn't hold water. It is ridiculous that marijuana is illegal. But it is illegal, and it is not unreasonable for the hospital to not employ only people who abstain from illegal drug use. I expect school bus companies and airlines to do the same.

Should companies be in the position to decide which illegal drugs are acceptable? Or should active IV heroin users have access to the Pyxis? I am well aware that Marijuana and IV heroin are worlds apart, but there are are million drugs in between the two, and it is not the role of the employer to evaluate the acceptability of each.

The increasing control and regulation of individual liberties and rights is a creeping fascism, in my view.

Fascism is a a system of government. Implying that random drug testing by a hospital is in any way related to fascism is a bit over the top.

What individual liberty and rights are infringed on when an employer mandates drug tests?

The division between private behavior and employment is not absolute, and nor should it be. I have a Commercial Driving License that allows me to drive a bus with passengers. If I get a DWI or reckless driving ticket, I can't argue that that is my personal life, and that I would never do such a thing with passengers. When they fire me, they are not interfering with my rights or liberties, they are asserting their right to employ who they see fit.

I work with plenty of people- docs and nurses who use recreational drugs. I trust them completely, and what they do on their own time has no bearing on my assessment of their competence I just hung out with two old friends who smoke pot. One is a firefighter, one is a teacher. They are apparently not subject to drug testing. I am. It might have been nice to join them, but I don't do illegal drugs because I could lose my job. If smoking pot was important to me, I would get another job.

It is really quite alright for you to disagree.

I believe that a government which puts the "rights" of a corporation, business, or other nonhuman entity above and before the rights of an individual mirrors the intent of the fascists in Italian history.

For me, this is not about cannabis usage, it is about business poking their nose into personal business which should be private. If business has a reason to suspect unacceptable behavior on the part of the employee they have every right to demand a drug test. In the absence of a reasonable concern the requirement to test is an intrusion into private personal information, IMV.

Submitting to a drug test requires that the employee proactively provide a listing of all medications taken. In the absence of some untoward or undesireable behavior or performance on the part of the employee, that information should be protected and unavailable to the employer. It is none of their business which medications their employee is utilizing unless there is a concern about performance or ability to carry out the duties of the position.

There is a big difference between a matter of public record (DUI, which signifies that the individual was not only impaired but also utilized poor judgement and broke the law) and the corporate determination that they are going to subject all employees, or a group of employees to a drug screen as a witch hunt.

Because I work as an RN shouldn't mean that I give up my rights to privacy, etc.

Smoking pot is not important to me either, individual rights are.