Workplace Drug Screening Opinion Case Study

PAGES
3
WORDS
1173
Cite

Drug Testing in the Workplace Most employers in the United States are not required to do drug testing on either current or potential employees, although the majority have the right to do so (United States Department of Labor, 2010). Drug testing is not required under the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988. The Act can be confusing and challenging for employers, however, since it essentially states that any organization receiving federal grants or contracts must be drug-free but does not contain language that specifically allows for drug testing (Thompson Reuters 2011). Many state and local governments limit or prohibit drug testing unless required for certain jobs with state or Federal governments.

As far back as 1997, the American Civil Liberties Union was deploring the use of drug testing in the workplace, citing an increase of 277% over a ten-year period (American Civil Liberties Union, 1997). Drug testing remains a controversial issue and one's viewpoint often depends on whether one is an employer or an employee.

Individuals who are not drug users may give little thought to drug testing in the workplace. It is not an issue they can ignore. According to a study several years ago by the U.S. Department of Labor, more than eight million Americans use some type of illegal substance. As many as seventy-three percent of illicit drug users were reported to be employed (Smith, 2004, p. 45). It is difficult to find statistics since there is no mandatory reporting, but one can probably assume that these numbers have not changed much in the intervening years. It was likely then and now that many of the employed drug users worked for small firms that cannot afford to do drug testing or believe they do not need it.

...

Results are accurate and considered more reliable than urine tests (Department of Labor, 2010). Since the late 1990s, there have been considerable developments in the use of oral fluid (saliva) for drug testing. The saliva tests can detect drugs from cannabis to heroin. Concentrations of amphetamines, cocaine and some opiates are higher in saliva than they are in blood plasma (Drummer, 2006), making saliva testing more accurate and reliable. Drugs tend to move quickly through the blood and into the urine. Urine testing is effective for drugs, but not as effective for alcohol, which tends to pass quickly through the system. It is important to remember that urine testing shows the presence or absence of drug metabolites in the urine, which are the residues that remain after a drug has worn off. Thus, a positive test does not necessarily mean a person was under the influence of drugs at the time of the test, but does show if drugs were used within a certain window (U.S. Department of Labor, 2010). Hair samples provide an even bigger testing window -- they can show drug use within a period of ninety days -- but, like the urine tests, hair sample tests do not show that a person is under the influence but only that drugs have been used. Sweat tests are administered through patches that are worn on the skin for some time. They are thus not effective in determining whether an individual is currently under the influence, but they are useful for checking compliance with probation and parole…

Sources Used in Documents:

References

Drug-free workplace policy builder. Section 7: Drug testing. (2010). U.S. Department of Labor.

Retrieved from http://www.dol.gov/elaws/asp/drugfree/drugs/screen92.asp

Drummer, O.H. (2006). Drug testing in oral fluid. Clinical Biochemist Reviews 27(30), pp. 147-

Privacy in America: Workplace drug testing. (1997). American Civil Liberties Union.
Retrieved from http://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform_technology-and-liberty/privacy-america-workplace-drug-testing
Thompson Reuters. (2011). Drug testing during hiring. FindLaw. Retrieved from http://employment.findlaw.com/employment/employment-employee-hiring/employment-employee-privacy-drug-test.html
Workplace drug testing. (2010). U.S. Department of Labor. Retrieved from http://www.dol.gov/asp/programs/drugs/workingpartners/dfworkplace/dt.asp#q5


Cite this Document:

"Workplace Drug Screening Opinion" (2011, August 08) Retrieved April 24, 2024, from
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/workplace-drug-screening-opinion-117730

"Workplace Drug Screening Opinion" 08 August 2011. Web.24 April. 2024. <
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/workplace-drug-screening-opinion-117730>

"Workplace Drug Screening Opinion", 08 August 2011, Accessed.24 April. 2024,
https://www.paperdue.com/essay/workplace-drug-screening-opinion-117730

Related Documents

Workplace Drug Screening Testing for drugs has developed into a significant security concern in places of work for management. The purpose of screening is to diminish the effects that illegal substance abuse has on the places of business, comprising lateness, non-attendance, turnover, mind-set troubles, theft, reduced output, misdeeds and hostility. "The U.S. Department of Labor estimates that drug use in the workplace costs employers $75 to $100 billion dollars annually in

In my opinion, a company wishing to conduct pre-employment screening should engage the services of a professional and respected service provider. Mathis and Jackson (2010) further advise that "the information provided in criminal record checks should be used judiciously and with caution." It is also important to note that increasingly, organizations are making use of other cost friendly and convenient methods of accessing past information about job applicants. According to

Law Enforcement Interview Imagine studying the opinion of another law enforcement officer. What could one learn from that individual? Does he or she have any recommendations that are worth mentioning? How is discipline issues handled? One will discuss the various questions asked to Daniel Heinze with much analysis. Why are ethics and character so important in the field of law enforcement? Daniel (2011) believes that ethics and character is quite important in the

" (1995) The authors state: "The amphetamines occasioned dose-related increases in d- amphetamine-appropriate responding, whereas hydromorphone did not. Amphetamines also occasioned dose-related increases in reports of the drug being most like "speed," whereas hydromorphone did not. However, both amphetamines and hydromorphone occasioned dose-related increases in reports of drug liking and in three scales of the ARCI. Thus, some self-report measures were well correlated with responding on the drug-appropriate lever and some

4. The paper is very well presented but simply needs grammar and stylistic corrections. The author obviously has a good grasp of the topic and organized his or her ideas. By cleaning up bad grammar in phrases like "they are a minimum of opinions," this could be a good paper. The use of first person is fine, but the author might have improved that by including anecdotes instead of just

(Chizek, 2003) The Role legal nurse consultant may provide service in a number of roles, including but not limited to: Consulting expert Testifying expert Facility-based investigator Trainer and in-service presenter Peer reviewer Quality improvement, risk management, claims management Liability insurance marketer and clinical resource" (Chizek, 2003) As standards of care constantly change, medical and nursing staff must keep informed of current standard to develop and/or modify policies and procedures, which must be maintained and secured indefinitely. In the