FREE ESSAY ON DRUG TESTING

DRUG TESTING

The ethics of drug testing has become an increased concern for many companies in the
recent years. More companies are beginning to use it and more people are starting more to
have problems with it. The tests are now more than ever seen as a way to stop the
problems of drug abuse in the workplace. 
This brings up a very large question. Is drug testing an ethical way to decide employee
drug use? It is also very hard to decide if the test is an invasion of employee privacy.
"The ethical status of workplace drug testing can be expressed as a question of competing
interests, between the employer's right to use testing to reduce drug related harms and
maximize profits, over against the employee's right to privacy, particularly with regard
to drug use which occurs outside the workplace." (Cranford 2)
The rights of the employee have to be considered. The Supreme Court case, Griswold vs.
Connecticut outlines the idea that every person is entitled to a privacy zone. However
this definition covers privacy and protection from government. To work productively
especially when the work may be physical it is nearly impossible to keep one's privacy. 
The relationship between employer and employee is based on a contract. The employee
provides work for the employer and in return he is paid. If the employee cannot provide
services because of problems such as drug abuse, then he is violating the contract.
Employers have the right to know many things about their employees. Job skills and
training can even be investigated by the employer. 
The employee is to perform services and these services must be done in a certain manner.
Someone who is incoherent because of drug abuse cannot be a pilot for example. This is
why employers can test to see if characteristics or tendencies would affect performance.

An employee may not want to give a urine or blood sample. The employee may not want to
include all of their references but this is besides the fact that an employer is entitled
to them. More and more employers are starting to feel this way. A 1996 survey by the
American Management Association found 81 percent of major U.S. companies had drug-testing
programs at that time compared with 78 percent in 1995 and just 22 percent in 1987. (May
2)
The employer has a right to only certain information and the line must also be drawn in
the procedure to obtain the information. For example a polygraph has been known to make
mistakes so this cannot be the sole source of information. 
The procedure in which the tests are taken is a major concern. This decision went all the
way to the Supreme Court. Samuel K. Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives Association found
that urine and blood tests were minimally obtrusive. The taking of blood was found to
cause no real pain or risk and is commonly done in ordinary life. The taking of urine in
a medical situation with no observation was also found not to cause intrusions. Drug
tests check for illegal substances. With this exactness drug testing is the most
efficient way to find which employees are using drugs. 
While some could argue that a certain employee's performance on drugs would be below the
level of another employee's performance that is not on drugs but is just a poor
performer. This leads into the most important point of the entire essay that employees
have the right to a workplace that is free from the many problems of drugs.
It could possibly be argued that since employers have to allow their employees time off
and times of decreased performance due to problems such as sickness and pregnancy that
they should allow excuses for drugs. However drug use is an addiction. Depending on the
addiction it must be met frequently. Problems such as sickness go away but addictions are
constant and not allowable. The work that the employee puts in should be their best.
"Since the employer has purchased the employees time, the employer has a proprietary
right to ensure that the time purchased is used as efficiently as possible."(Cranford 6)

Many people have a problem with employees having to choose between their job and their
drugs. For example what if the person is hooked and cannot do anything about their
addiction. Should the person have to live with no means of income because of their
addiction? It is a difficult question to answer. Addicts are people who have needs like
anyone else. Should they be denied the means to basic necessities such as food and
shelter that a job would provide? The solution to this problem should be found in
treatment to the individual while they maintain their job. The drug testing itself forces
employees to confront the problems that they have. It is possible that people will see
companies as cruel when they try to get the most production out of their people. However,
a work force that is clean and sober is a win for both sides. The financial status of the
company is inherently intertwined with the good of employees; as the corporation becomes
increasingly profitable, employees are increasingly benefited.(Cranford 8)
Some parties argue placing employees in a position where they must choose between
maintaining their privacy or losing their jobs is fundamentally coercive.(Cranford 6)
This decision is easy to make for most employees and they take the test. Those people who
already are in employment and refuse become suspect. People who are applying for jobs and
refuse are not considered at all or seen on an extremely negative scale. 
Another argument that has a number of holes through it is the idea that what an employee
does on their own time is their own decision. This should be allowable for most things
even those on the borderline. An employer may not want their employees to go hunting or
skydiving on the weekends because of the potential for harm to the investment a company
has in an employee. However, this should not be enforceable because it has no everyday
effect on their work. Unless the person perishes in a crash, skydiving has no effect on a
person's Monday morning management skills. Now if an employee is involved with illegal
drugs on their own time the effects linger in their system. Even when there are no drugs
in the system this is when the body craves more to satisfy their addiction. An addiction
is not able to stay just within the bounds of the employees own time. 
There should be an outline for giving the tests. The tests should be given only when the
behavior is unusual and bizarre. The tests should be given without prior notice to reduce
the chance that employees could foil the test. The employees that fail the test should be
allowed to keep their jobs while receiving their treatment. Termination should only come
after treatment has been refused or failed.