5 ms·

> It should be my right as an employer to hire anyone that I wish (just like it is your right as an employee to not accept a position or quit). Would you also

> It should be my right as an employer to hire anyone that I wish (just like it is your right as an employee to not accept a position or quit). Would you also refuse to hire an employee who drinks heavily on Friday/Saturday nights, yet never once comes to work drunk? Furthermore, would this even be legal (or ethical)? Drug testing in the work environment has been shown to be counterproductive for many reasons. Since you seem to care more about the practical impact (not the ethical one), I'll focus on this one: marijuana remains detectable in the system for two weeks after use, whereas most drugs (like cocaine) are undetectable after two days. So what's the message that you're sending your employees? 'On Friday night, rather than use marijuana, I'd prefer it if you used cocaine or methamphetamine instead.' That way, they'll be sure to pass Monday's drug test, which they'd have failed if they had been 'foolish' enough to inhale from a bong instead of a crack pipe/meth pipe! So even if you think your employees shouldn't use drugs on their own time, even if it never affects their work, drug testing in the workplace is the worst way to encourage healthy behavior.

ericd 15y ago
You're creating all kinds of strawmen here. Pot being banned doesn't make people smoke crack. And sure, it's legal and ethical for an employer not to want to employ anyone they don't want to work with, as long as it's not a protected class. Drug use wasn't one of those, last I checked. It's not necessarily a smart idea to fire qualified people who smoke pot on their own time just because you don't like the idea of having pot smokers represent your company, but it's not wrong.
- mattmanser 15y ago
  It's not wrong for your employer to start dictating what you do on your own time? Damn you Americans have one fucked up country, all hail your corporate overlords! Guess who doesn't take those tests too? The CEOs and the directors and the partners. They can snort as much coke as they want, but woe betide the worker bees doing it. The utter hypocrisy of it all is astounding.
  - ericd 15y ago
    You're missing the point - it's their right to employ who they want (with a few mandated exceptions), just as it's the workers' right to work for whomever they want. Yes, some employers use that right to make decisions based on poor metrics, but that's the price of freedom for all, and other employers who aren't bigoted can benefit.

ericd 15y ago

You're creating all kinds of strawmen here. Pot being banned doesn't make people smoke crack. And sure, it's legal and ethical for an employer not to want to employ anyone they don't want to work with, as long as it's not a protected class. Drug use wasn't one of those, last I checked. It's not necessarily a smart idea to fire qualified people who smoke pot on their own time just because you don't like the idea of having pot smokers represent your company, but it's not wrong.

mattmanser 15y ago
It's not wrong for your employer to start dictating what you do on your own time? Damn you Americans have one fucked up country, all hail your corporate overlords! Guess who doesn't take those tests too? The CEOs and the directors and the partners. They can snort as much coke as they want, but woe betide the worker bees doing it. The utter hypocrisy of it all is astounding.
- ericd 15y ago
  You're missing the point - it's their right to employ who they want (with a few mandated exceptions), just as it's the workers' right to work for whomever they want. Yes, some employers use that right to make decisions based on poor metrics, but that's the price of freedom for all, and other employers who aren't bigoted can benefit.