
Hiring Hurdle: Finding Workers Who Can Pass a Drug Test - aaronbrethorst
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/18/business/hiring-hurdle-finding-workers-who-can-pass-a-drug-test.html
======
thedevil
I see a different problem: lack of jobs that don't drug test.

I don't do any drugs and never been a fan of weed, but I sometimes won't apply
for a job if they drug test. I wish I could stick to this every time.

The no-drug-screen screen is actually a good filter. Companies with drug-
screening are, on average, more unpleasant to work at.

Just say no to drug screening, kids.

Edit: alright, to be fair, some of those jobs mentioned have good reason. But
the jobs that tested me didn't

~~~
was_boring
I also refuse to take drug tests. I also refuse to get security clearances,
which makes it a little more challenging living in the DC area.

------
csense
Drug testing is absolutely a good idea for jobs where worker impairment
presents an imminent physical danger to lives and property (e.g. trucking,
medical professions, powerline repair crews).

Likewise, limited use of criminal background checks may be a good idea for
certain jobs (a bank robber shouldn't be allowed to work in a bank).

But the idea that these should be general conditions of employment across all
industries is a problematic one. It creates an underclass of unemployable
people, forcing them to become a drain on society when they could be
productively employed (or encouraging them to become productively employed in
gray/black market activities).

~~~
cortesoft
Is it really a good idea, though? A guy can smoke a joint on the weekend and
do a dangerous job on Tuesday.

At the same time, passing a drug test doesn't mean you won't be intoxicated on
the job. They don't test everyday, and lots of drugs (alcohol, cocaine, etc)
get out of your system very quickly.

I understand the desire (you don't want someone on drugs at work), but drug
testing doesn't do a very good job of getting you that.

~~~
pcr0
It's certainly fine for most drugs.

The situation with weed is certainly the troubling one. You can test positive
for it for almost a month after moderate use. Add to that fact its increasing
legality and acceptance in the US and you've got a widespread employment
problem.

------
AndrewKemendo
If you want a contract, loan, tax benefit or anything else explicit from the
federal government _or any contractor of the federal government_ \- you have
to institute drug screening policies, which are audited.

edit: The implication I am making is that this is literally the only (IMO)
good reason to have such a policy.

~~~
aianus
Amazon definitely has government contracts but they don't drug test their
engineers (or at least they never drug tested me).

Any ideas how they get around it? Do AWS engineers get drug tested?

~~~
viraptor
Do you actually work on anything related to those contracts? There could be
strict separation in place and people without approval / clearance may not be
involved at all.

~~~
aianus
No, the contracts were in AWS iirc and I did not work in AWS.

(I realize it wasn't clear in my original comment, but that's why I'm curious
about AWS engineers' experience).

------
CapitalistCartr
As the quote from the article says: “most people can’t pass the drug test
because they don’t want to pass a drug test.”

I work in manufacturing. We make it easy to pass. Several days from interview
to test. That's every place I've been. And as the article suggests, its almost
exclusively whites not passing. I figure its a culture thing.

~~~
shkkmo
> Several days from interview to test

Not enough time to piss clean from Cannabis, but enough for some of the harder
drugs.

> And as the article suggests, its almost exclusively whites not passing

Doesn't that make drug tests a racist practice?

~~~
tyenl
Does the racial make up of NBA rosters make the NBA a racist organization?

~~~
clevernickname
Does the racial make up of your average tech company make them racist
organizations?

~~~
striking
The answer to both questions is "no."

------
stephengillie
Why would an employer want to drug test employees? Do some still believe there
is some kind of correlation between (prescription or self-medicated) drug use?

From the article: > _In Colorado, “to find a roofer or a painter that can pass
a drug test is unheard-of,”_

Sure, it makes some sense for a few, select jobs like truck driving. But why
would you care what your roofer or painter did last night, as long as the job
gets done?

If a prospective customer refused to buy your product unless you could prove
no employee used Percocet or Vicodin while working, would you drug test your
company for them?

~~~
brandonmenc
> But why would you care what your roofer or painter did last night

If I'm a roofer, I don't want the guy holding my ladder to be hung over.

~~~
CyberDildonics
Too bad alchohol isn't on the panel

~~~
Spoom
It is for truckers.

------
ASinclair
Many professional jobs don't require drug tests. So is it really about finding
the "best workers"? Could you imagine if software companies rejected people
for marijuana use?

~~~
cortesoft
Yes. My software company got bought by a large corporation that drug tests new
hires (because they do gov contracts, apparently), and it is WAY harder to
find employees now.

I know lots of developers who don't do drugs at all who refuse to take the
test out of principle.

------
unprepare
a lot of comments in here about how drug testing is ok for some positions,
like truck drivers and the like.

If your reasoning is impairment in some jobs could cause physical harm -
surely a reaction time based test should be implemented for these workers to
complete each morning before they turn on this heavy machinery. This would be
much more effective in identifying unfit workers, doing it daily ensures that
workers are prepared to work for the day when they come in.

Its definitely disappointing seeing a supposedly educated group of people
buying in so readily to ages old propaganda. I cant believe how many people
think a pre employment drug test is going to keep truckers off meth - let
alone completely legal and untested things like nodoz, cough syrup, sleep
medicines, etc.

I'd much rather drive around a trucker on marijuana than benadryl, and i'd
absolutely rather drive next to a trucker who used marijuana 12 days ago than
a trucker who is double dosing cough syrup and taking some nodoz to stay
awake.

------
Inconel
I don't find pre-employment drug testing terribly problematic, although I
would be fine seeing it discontinued in most settings. While I don't use drugs
myself I don't have any ethical problems with drug use and I'm frequently in
the company of those who do use drugs.

Every single one of my friends smokes weed regularly and are employed despite
most of them being subject to drug testing during the hiring process. To me,
all a negative drug test shows is that a prospective employee either doesn't
use drugs(which is probably a relative rarity these days), or that they do use
drugs but are either resourceful enough to find a way to beat the test or
disciplined enough to plan ahead. I guess in this sense perhaps the tests do
serve some purpose.

My only issue would be with random unscheduled drug testing which to me serves
little purpose, outside of jobs were impairment may pose a risk to others.

Far more concerning to me are criminal records or poor credit being used to
withhold employment from a large segment of our population.

------
nullrend
And yet here I am, a lapsed tech support guy who started cooking for a living,
trying to break back into tech and nobody will touch me.

I don't do any drugs except alcohol and caffeine. But I don't have the right
background anymore, so…

