Feel free to add comments

Yes, but only if they carry out alcohol testing too and at all levels of the company, from MD down.

NO!

Well perhaps in industries where health and safety involved, eg driving and lifting heavy machinery.

(Guess which industries I don't work in!!!)

And if you need someone prepared to stripsearch the young female staff then bobs your uncle I'm your man.
Not a lot of experience I confess but always prepared to compensate with enthusiasm.
There's not much would escape my scrutiny in that department.So if your organization is being crippled by drug-crazed staff just say the word.

What drugs, what tests?

8) I voted no.....what ever next....:x

I voted yes - and sack, because if you are being paid to do a job you should give it your full attention and you can't do that when high on drugs, or alcohol for that matter.

agreed. use of drugs at work compromises safety at the top of a very long list.

but should employers be able to test and then sack an employee if that employees drug taking has little measurable effect on their work (i.e they get bladdered on alcohol or starry eyed on E one a week). Or should employers be free to sack any employee on the grounds of using drugs at some time in their employment?

Some Silicon Valley companies tried hair testing their employees, but such was the economic climate, the employees upped and left for companies that didn't drug test their employees. I gather urine tests are pretty routine in the US in some industries.

It rather smacks of nannying more than any invasion of civil liberties.

Anyone who has a problem with comany drug testing can always find another job.

Yes they should as employers pay employees to be productive and if there is a person who has a problem with alcohol or drugs then it should be the employers right to find out and deal with that person accordingly.

In the last place I worked there was a manager who had a serious drink problem and would not admit to it so never got his prob sorted. As a result his team suffered and so did his career because he was demoted while I was there.

There was also people who used to smoke joints of an afternoon sat in their car in the carpark!!! There is a time and place for things and stuff like this is better off done out of work

Xxxxxxxxxx

Despite my previous flippant posting I am against testing. IMO there are already sufficient methods of determining a person's fitness for the job. If a person is not carrying out their work in a satisfactory manner then most companies have proper disciplinary procedures for handling this. If they need to test for drugs or alcohol then it implies that the person is not affected by the drugs otherwise the employer, or their colleagues, would notice.

Using existing disciplinary procedures, verbal, written warnings, etc., an employer could ensure that that person's performance improves. Failing that, then the final sanction would be the sack. All without infringing on the person's privacy.

Basically, if a person is doing their job leave them alone.

Xxxxxxxxxx

Originally posted by huwj
Well put maxt - I couldn't agree more!!

Thank you, you're too kind. :blush: