For example, many professional organizations in completely benign fields (i.e. those not in any way associated with potential risks to the public, corruption, or violations of fiduciary responsibilities) utilize employment drug screening.
Whereas it is obvious why even private commercial employers have a legitimate interest in prohibiting the use of any intoxicating substances (including alcohol) on company property or during working hours, that merely justifies disciplinary action for those types of violations. Conversely, that concern does not justify drug testing that covers employees' private use of time away from work any more than it justifies testing employees for alcohol use away from the job.
Similarly, it is justifiable for police agencies to conduct drug screening for recreational drug use even in employees' private time, because drug use among police officers conflicts with their sworn responsibilities to enforce drug laws. Steroid testing of police officers would be justified even if steroids were legal, because of the potential link between steroid use and anger management issues, which could expose the public to danger as well as result in costly civil liability for the employing agency and community.
However, it is difficult to justify drug testing (either of steroids or recreational drugs) of professional athletes, because their employment relates strictly to entertainment; drug use among professional athletes is no more dangerous to society than drug use among professional actors. Finally, employment drug testing fails to distinguish...
Assuming for the sake of
argument that the actual cognitive effects of smoking
marijuana are comparable to those of drinking alcohol, it is difficult to justify testing employees with regard to their marijuana use while on
vacation.
Conclusion:
Employment drug testing serves a valuable purpose anytime it is necessary to ensure against risks to
public safety, to prevent
corruption in public officials and authorized agents of the state, or to reduce the susceptibility of employees with fiduciary responsibilities to undue influence capable of arising in
connection with drug use.
Conversely, employment drug testing of many other types of employees is not justified by any legitimate concern and violates the principle and spirit of constitutional
privacy rights, even when conducted by private entities instead of government entities.
Bibliography
Dershowitz, a. (2002). Shouting Fire:
Civil Liberties in a Turbulent Age. New York:
Little Brown & Co.
