and no one irl even has the decency to agree with me because it's so fucking drilled into the culture that these fucking BuNsInNesSes have a Right to do this because it's a bSUsniEss. like oh yeah they have an office building so they definitely get to analyze my piss because they say they want to. sick fucking freaks.

preaching to the choir a bit on lemmy (or i would hope so at least) but still

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] RadButNotAChad@lemmy.world 157 points 2 weeks ago

My company does not do drug tests and never has. Someone asked the owner why and he said 'Id lose a lot of good people'

[-] ForestOrca@kbin.social 45 points 2 weeks ago

Sounds like you work for a good company, at least with respect to drug testing.

[-] RadButNotAChad@lemmy.world 26 points 2 weeks ago

They're good people who take good care of me.

[-] instamat@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago

This is what companies used to be like and why people worked at a job for 40+ years

[-] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 35 points 2 weeks ago

I worked for one place like that. I worked in another place, in the same industry, where they decided to drug test all their employees one day. They lost everyone from 3rd shift, and everyone from 2nd shift except my supervisor and myself.

After that, they rapidly started to lose customers...

[-] folkrav@lemmy.ca 18 points 2 weeks ago

Did they really expect 3rd shift people to be clean lol

[-] drcobaltjedi@programming.dev 17 points 2 weeks ago

My current job and a different job I had, didn't drug test people. Current job has a few stoners at the upper levels so they just don't test people. The other company was very small, was mostly developers, and had a high bar for getting an interview, so they knew that also going "also you have to be clean" wasn't a good idea to do to developers especially after recreational pot became legal.

Honestly I've seen a lot less dev jobs do drug testing since it whittles down too many otherwise perfectly competent employees.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] rah@feddit.uk 149 points 2 weeks ago
[-] ImplyingImplications@lemmy.ca 122 points 2 weeks ago

This. In Canada, most drug testing is considered a violation of rights and freedoms because your employer should not have a say in how you live your life. There are exceptions for high risk jobs where an impaired worker could cause death by negligence.

[-] nbailey@lemmy.ca 39 points 2 weeks ago

Bingo. If my boss asked for my piss I’d go straight to HR. Americans put up with so much insane stuff when it comes to work.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] TheDubh@lemmy.world 25 points 2 weeks ago

I can understand the high risk jobs one and think that’s fair. In the town I grew up in some factories would do drug test as a way to fire people with cause instead of having layoffs. A few were more seasonal work, so once seasons changed and demand dropped then more drug testing started.

[-] Broken_Monitor@lemmy.world 28 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

It’s also an insurance thing. Drug testing programs are expensive, but the insurance companies incentivize it with huge discounts. It turns out that people who don’t do drugs are less accident prone and are usually a bit healthier too. This explains why US hospitals frequently test for tobacco use. It has nothing to do with the legality of use. This is why even with weed getting legalized many companies will still test for it.

load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] bemenaker@lemmy.world 108 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks Reagan. Fun fact, in the mid 80's Reagan's administration did a big study to show how effective drug testing in the workplace was, and how much it raised productivity. When they got the results back, it found productivity had dropped, and workplace safety hadn't changed. The results said the program was a complete failure. They tried to bury the report and not release it. Rolling Stone magazine sued the government to get a copy, since it was made with public money, and won. They were the only media outlet to publish the results.

[-] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago

Happen to have a link? That sounds interesting but my Google fu is weak today and couldn't find it.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Subverb@lemmy.world 71 points 2 weeks ago

I run a manufacturing business; you oversimplify.

Quite coincidentally my HR person came to me just an hour ago and told me that two people have complained of a coworker smoking on breaks and at lunch and being high on the job.

He drives a heavy forklift. Am I to ignore the situation? If I do I expose my employees to danger and my small business to lawsuits.

How are the employees that reported it supposed to react if I say "Whatever, that's his business."

To a large extent businesses have their hands tied by the rules and laws of society.

[-] viking@infosec.pub 33 points 2 weeks ago

But what you are saying is probable cause. I think the OP complains about random testing without any justification.

In your example, even if you were not legally entitled to carry out a drug test, you could simply call the police and let them do the check.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (26 replies)
[-] qwertyqwertyqwerty@lemmy.one 64 points 2 weeks ago

You know it's all bullshit because they don't/can't test for alcohol dependence, which is way more devastating to a person's productivity than cannabis.

[-] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 35 points 2 weeks ago

I have never been given a breathalyzer at work, either for pre-employment or post-accident.

I do vividly recall being drug tested for hitting a support column with a forklift. I passed. The next day, someone else hit the same post. He smelled like a bar mat. No test for him.

[-] transientpunk@sh.itjust.works 17 points 2 weeks ago

My job breathalyzed me in addition to the piss test. I asked the attendant about the breathalyzer test, and she said that it's common for people to fail it.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] CptInsane0@lemmy.world 52 points 2 weeks ago

Hard drugs also don't show up on a drug test nearly as long as weed does, so you're really only stopping people who smoked in the last month, while others are doing whatever.

[-] CADmonkey@lemmy.world 21 points 2 weeks ago

And add to that the fact that a test for THC isn't able to tell if someone is high right then. The tests only check for the metabolites of THC, not THC itself.

[-] Phen@lemmy.eco.br 50 points 2 weeks ago

Damn, América really is crazy. I wouldn't accept such tests and I've never even tried drugs.

[-] soggy_kitty@sopuli.xyz 47 points 2 weeks ago

Depends what your job was. If you're my 747 pilot I would be outraged if you refused a drugs test when asked.

There's a time and a place for regulated drugs tests.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 49 points 2 weeks ago

You should see how they do it in the service industry. No tests to get the job, but if you're ever hurt at work and entitled to workman's comp they give you a test and if you've smoked weed anytime in the last month the presumption is that you were high at work and not only do they not have to pay you for your injury but they just flat-out fire you.

[-] TopRamenBinLaden@sh.itjust.works 35 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The worker's comp drug tests are such a disgusting example of late stage capitalism.

Imagine that you made a lot of money and lived comfortably off of the hard work of others. Then when one of those others got hurt while making money for you, you go out of your way to make sure you don't have to help them cover the medical costs. Also, you take their only source of income away from them so they couldn't even cover it themselves if they wanted to.

I can't imagine being that heartless, and its literally just standard pretty much everywhere in the US. It is very saddening.

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 17 points 2 weeks ago

This is the intersection of two elements of our culture:

  1. everyone must always do everything they can to make as much money as possible regardless of the consequences

  2. if someone uses drugs, they're not a person anymore and it's okay to hurt them as much as is within your power

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] pete_the_cat@lemmy.world 48 points 2 weeks ago

It really depends on the position and what they're testing for. Do you really want a heavy machinery operator to be a cokehead or heroin addict? There is a real risk of them killing someone. Testing someone in a job like IT for smoking weed? That's a different story.

Also a lot of the time they only test you post-hiring if you fucked up somehow.

It can definitely be used against people (usually the disenfranchised) though to prevent them being hired or to get them fired.

[-] DemBoSain@midwest.social 54 points 2 weeks ago

The place I work will fire you on the spot if you test positive for marijuana. Marijuana is legal in this state. If I smoke on the weekend, and then test positive on Wednesday, I lose my job.

However, if I get ripple-dee-doo-dah shit-faced Tuesday night, come in on Wednesday miserably hung over, I'll pass that piss test. And still be more impaired than I would be from that joint I had Saturday night.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[-] MTK@lemmy.world 41 points 2 weeks ago

Imagine thinking "my employees are performing great but maybe I should check their pee to be sure"

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] TerkErJerbs@lemm.ee 36 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)
[-] echodot@feddit.uk 33 points 2 weeks ago

They can't do this in Europe unless it's actually dangerous for the job, medical professional, operating heavy industrial machinery, cop etc. It's just because the US has no worker rights laws.

You don't want someone who is still high driving a train, but it's probably fine if all I need to do is off work.

load more comments (9 replies)
[-] ShaunaTheDead@kbin.social 31 points 2 weeks ago

In Canada (and I think in most of the world) it's illegal to randomly test employees unless you have reasonable cause.

Testing of an individual employee may be allowed in specific cases where there is reasonable cause to believe the employee is impaired by drugs or alcohol while on duty or is unable to work safely due to impairment from alcohol or drugs.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Meho_Nohome@sh.itjust.works 30 points 2 weeks ago

My biggest fear is failing one when I haven't taken anything. I never have, but I know people who have. I've also known people who have passed after getting totally blitzed the night before. They are wildly inaccurate, aside from being an invasion of privacy.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] kttnpunk@lemmy.world 27 points 2 weeks ago

It's especially frustrating as someone who needs cannabis for severe anxiety, because it's anxiety inducing in itself to have to hide it and that pretty much cancels out the benefits for me- it's something we absolutely need to destigmatize at work especially.

load more comments (7 replies)
[-] jadedwench@lemmy.world 24 points 2 weeks ago

I am so glad my new job doesn't test unless if there is an industrial accident or in very specific dangerous positions where it is warranted. Handbook basically says don't show up to work fucked up. What you do on your own time is your business.

It is a huge breach of privacy, especially when you have to start disclosing legally prescribed medications that they test for. Why a company has a right to my body, my medical history, or any other private information is nuts.

The fact that there is a system, run by Equifax of course, where employers can choose to hand your work history, paystubs, and other information to and then other companies can then pay to get access to is also nuts. You can request to have it frozen, but who the hell even knows to do this? It is messed up.


load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Crazyslinkz@lemmy.world 20 points 2 weeks ago

You know teachers are never drug tested in the US.

Neither should they be unless there is a suspected problem.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Smoogs@lemmy.world 20 points 2 weeks ago

Like ok maybe drug testing someone who is driving/flying a bunch of people around…I kinda get it. Safety of the public etc.

But drug testing at an office job? Come fucking on. That’s political face. Nothing more.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] dual_sport_dork@lemmy.world 19 points 2 weeks ago

The main thing is, as long as you don't show up to work blitzed I don't see how anyone should give a shit. Whatever you do at home is your business, provided you leave it at home.

That's the policy at my business. IDGAF if you spend all of your off hours at the bottom of a bottle or on top of cloud nine, just don't bring it to work.

Additional problems include: If there is a workplace accident and someone gets injured, both OSHA and insurance companies immediately come knocking to try to do drug tests on everyone involved purely as an attempt to shift blame and deny claims. We don't have any heavy equipment here or anything so I'm not too worried about that, but there are businesses in America that would get fucked in a situation like that so they're kind of forced to enact drug bans even if management doesn't want to on a personal level.

load more comments (8 replies)
[-] guyrocket@kbin.social 19 points 2 weeks ago

I completely agree.

Many years ago I applied for a McJob at Worst Buy. They had mandatory drug testing even (especially?) for the lowest level job I was applying for.

I couldn't pee when I went to the medical place for the test. Not sure I recall correctly but I think I went back a second time and drank a lot of water and was full of piss so I could do it. They never got back to me. No idea why. I guess they picked up the nicotine and didn't want to hire a cigarette smoker.

When I think about this now I'm pretty horrified that I even did the pee test. It would be exceptional circumstances for me to do this for anything employment related now. I'm very clean now but it is none of their fucking business. It does surprise me that it is legal.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Auduras@lemmy.world 17 points 2 weeks ago

I agree, but some jobs I can see why, like if you're an air traffic controller, operate heavy machinery, etc. Government jobs and Government contractors ($100k+ contracts) also require them but that's a government job...

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 11 Nov 2023
724 points (90.0% liked)

Unpopular Opinion

1 readers
2 users here now


  1. No racism or bigotry.

  2. Be civil: disagreements happen, but that doesn't provide the right to personally insult others.

  3. No spam posting.

  4. Shitposts and memes are allowed until they prove to be a problem. They can and will be removed at moderator discretion.

  5. No trolling.

Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about

founded 6 months ago