A little piece, but one that made me stand up and cheer on a small miner’s union in Vancouver.
Miners Union Fights Drug-Testing Policy
VANCOUVER, B.C. (CN) – A coal miners union wants Teck Coal to put the brakes on a random drug-testing policy before wrapping up arbitration proceedings.
The union claims that the new policy is unjustified, as injury rates at open-pit mines are “lower than that for a lawn bowling facility.”
Two locals of the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers International Union claim in B.C. Supreme Court that Teck Coal wants to start randomly drug and alcohol testing miners at its open-pit Elkview and Fording River coal mines known by Dec. 3.
The union filed a grievance, citing privacy concerns. It claims that until now, the company tested workers only before hiring them, for “reasonable cause,” or after an accident.
That’s something that any good union should do – protect its workers from unreasonable intrusion into their private lives.
I really liked a recent tweet from Lee Rosenberg:
Based on my experience, if I encounter a company that wants to drug test applicants, I conclude they have management problems.
Exactly.
He followed that up with a post where he noted that certain industries (in particular, those who need to compete for the best workers) have generally dropped out of the drug testing craze…
Being in the software/internet/IT world, I don’t have to worry about this any more. In fact, if I come across a company that actually wants me to take a drug test (and isn’t being forced by federal policy to do so), I’d take it as a sign there’s something wrong with the company. It’s like saying “we’re so dysfunctional, a person with a drug problem can pass the interview and work here unnoticedâ€. Almost no companies do it.
Another industry where you’re generally safe is government, as courts have generally held that, except in safety-sensitive positions, government drug testing can be a Fourth Amendment violation.
The entertainment industry usually seems to know better as well.
Most ‘creative’ types won’t tolerate that level of distrust: it’s simply the most complete invasion of personal freedom that can be imagined. If that’s company policy, you probably won’t be happy working there, as there probably won’t be much creative expression allowed anyway.
I wonder if Google tests? Hmmm. 🙂
I thought the kind of drug testing being talked about here was already banned in Canada.
And the author may have had a run of really good luck, but he’s dreaming if he thinks the tech industry isn’t nearly as piss-drunk as the rest of them.
My wife works for a liquor distributor some guy from HR wanted to start random testing. The CEO told him to go ahead if wanted to replace 75% of the sales force. They never started that.
The place we really need random testing is congress,,hell,I would settle for one surprise mandatory.
Now there’s a concept! Woo, hoo!
They’d probably have to replace about 75% of their work force as well!
How many of those right wing nut jobs would test positive for UN-prescribed prescription pills?
Probably less than the Left-wing nut jobs.
I figured the left wing guys would test positive for MJ and LSD. You know gotta play to the stereo-types.
Milton Friedman and William F Buckley jr were what I would consider “right-wing”. Both were against drug prohibition. Please don’t stereotype and realize that there is also a lot of leftists with a totalitarian agenda.
Unperson,
If you can’t understand a joke then maybe you should put the pipe down and back away slowly.
Besides, since the hey-day of Friedman and Buckley the right wing has become neo-cons and religious conservatives like Rush Limbaugh, John Ashcroft, Todd Akin and the like. I dont think Friedman or Buckley fit in with that group. That and Friedman would be considered libertarian which would also be where I place myself.
Unperson,
Did you not have a problem with the stereo-typing of the left wing guys?
Since when did the U.N. start writing prescriptions?
[drumroll][rimshot]
That is good Duncan.
I’m having a debate with somebody from Western Free Press about retribution for drug war crimes. Anybody wish to chime in?
I went, typed out a fair response… and like many wwwebsites these days doesn’t completely work w/ my outdated ‘puter and browsers, so it didn’t even enter the comment. If someone wishes to post it, here tis:
if someone wants to post it for me please do – and tell us here so we don’t be redundant.
can’t copy/paste and I would leave something out trying to just writ it out.
I did it for you, Allan, look for your comment posted by Witchwindy, I intended to include c/p from a post by Allan at DrugWarRant, but clicked the post button too soon.
thanks Windy!
Done
BRILLIANT! THANKS Allan, and Windy, and Clay, and Duncan, and Bruce!
i thought Sam held his own to elicit WFS’s smarmy remark and then a one-word sentence too.
he never answered about the tylenol in the opiate medicines,I think he is in over his head on trying to defend the people guilty of crimes against humanity,he keeps akipping around subjects he isn’t sure of.
He also didn’t supply us with at least one principled argument in support of prohibition. I just left him the following:
Bruce said: ” I can’t help but notice that you have been unable to name one principled argument in favour of prohibition, merely asserting over and over that MalcolmKyle1’s approach is off-putting.”
@WFS Seeing how you claimed there WERE such arguments, you could at least try to give us one of them —no matter how spurious it may seem we’ll at least have something on which to debate further.
You know, you could claim that motherhood and eating dinner are safety sensitive positions. Unless the guy is doing something like flying an airplane or driving a school bus I think its all a big violation of the Fourth Amendment.
Are unemployment and welfare safety sensitive positions?
I think in most cases you are substituting an expensive corporate regimen for the same functionality that a supervisor or foreman has. Its not only a personal embarrassment and intrusion, it is costly and it is redundant.
Why not test all drivers now for their drivers license? That’s probably the next bright idea. Forget the cop whose job it is to judge whether or not the driver is impaired.
This is someones bright idea of job creation in America. I am not sure it has anything to do with drugs in all reality.
“I am not sure it has anything to do with drugs in all reality.”
It never was. It’s a part of the mindset behind the Powell Memo and everything that has happened in the corp-rat world since. It’s all about reducing the workers to serfs…without looking like that’s what you are doing. Sloooooow, steady, drip-drip-drip of acid wearing away your rights and liberties, bit by bit, acclimating you to their loss…until you have none.
Drug testing ensures the serfs keep their heads down. For the last thing the would-be Lords and Masters of Commerce want is a thinking populace who’d be onto their games in a flash. And if anything is an aid to stepping off the treadmill they put us on from the time we become industrially useful, and making you think about life and how you want to live it, it’s cannabis.
Thank you for the auspicious writeup. It in reality was once a leisure account it. Look complex to more brought agreeable from you! However, how could we keep in touch?