Pee in a cup for the unemployed?/EDI... 
wen
13 y
1,053
Unemployment Drug Tests: Republicans' Unprecedented Pursuit Of Drug Testing The Jobless
WASHINGTON -- During a debate on the floor of the House of Representatives this week, Rep. Tom Reed (R-N.Y.) suggested the unemployed can't find jobs because of their own bad decisions.
"I have been back in my district, and we do town halls all the time," Reed said. "And what I've heard from small business owners across our district is that one of the main reasons that they cannot hire individuals is because they simply cannot pass a drug test."
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/16/unemployment-drug-test-republicans-j...
More
- its pot trapper/kcmo
13 y
994
MoreThis is a reply to # 1,891,589detectable for 30 days, a responsible(not counting the illegality of it) smoker is screwed.
- Re: its pot Tellurider
13 y
1,205
RR
This is a reply to # 1,891,613I pee in a cup for no one....ever....I'll pe
e on their head but not in a cup- Re: its pot trapper/kcmo
13 y
925
- Re: its pot Tellurider
13 y
1,129
- Re: its pot Tellurider
13 y
1,108
- Re: its pot turiya
13 y
941
- Re: its pot turiya
13 y
941
- Re: its pot Tellurider
13 y
1,108
- Re: its pot Tellurider
13 y
1,129
- Re: its pot trapper/kcmo
13 y
925
- Re: its pot Tellurider
13 y
1,205
RR
- Not one certain Republican and not t... Dquixote1217
13 y
952
MoreThis is a reply to # 1,891,589
There's one Republican that isn't pursuing that goal. In fact, I am sure he would be against drug testing period because it is unconstitutional. I'm with him 100% - what a person does on their own time is their business. If it affects their work performance then they can lose their job. If they do it at work and it can be proven that they did it at work, that is one thing. Otherwise, stick your drug tests up the closest orifice to where the urine comes from.
- Re: Pee in a cup for the unemployed?... Mike1953
13 y
1,043
This is a reply to # 1,891,628Not all jobs are equal, some jobs require focus and creativity where it makes for a more valuable employee.
I think the exception is a job that requires the workers to multitask where pot does not do well.
My job requires focus and precision, I consider it a tool of the trade.
Some of the inability of workers to focus on a task can be blamed on the false premise that multitasking enhances job performance. Trying to multitask actually lowers your IQ as the mind becomes too scattered to perform efficiently.
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/docLib/20080605_TNA20Rosen.pdf
- Re: Pee in a cup for the unemployed?... Dquixote1217
13 y
1,076
This is a reply to # 1,891,636
Yes, and my point is that poor job performance for whatever reason is grounds for losing one's job - thus if pot or any other thing caused job performance to suffer it could result in loss of a job. But not merely testing positive for a substance than can linger in the system up to a month. When it comes to pot, is it in any way fair to fire someone who smoked some week at a party two weeks ago and still tested positive despite not smoking at work and performing well? Methinks not.
- Re: Pee in a cup for the unemployed?... Hidden Username
13 y
1,009
This is a reply to # 1,891,652I totally agree and highly suggest that people look for employment from private employers if possible. I have worked for large corporations and they tend to fight over who gets bonuses blah,blah,blah. If you cannot start your own business or if you are trying to start your own business but need the extra income please, please, please try to find a small company that passes the profit down to their employees with bonuses and incentives and does not spend money on BS like drug test. If you are a good employee, that speaks for itself. I trully believe that everyone who is employable can find a job. And frankly I am tired of my tax dollars going to people who are on disability because they are addicted to drugs, alcohol and cigs. if you cannot work don't spend your disability on those things cause I am paying for it!!! Damn! Stop it! if you have a job and can pay for those things enjoy! But they are luxaries!
- Re: Pee in a cup for the unemployed?... Hidden Username
13 y
1,009
- Re: Pee in a cup for the unemployed?... Dquixote1217
13 y
1,076
- Re: Pee in a cup for the unemployed?... Mike1953
13 y
1,043
- Misdirection... uchihaMadara
13 y
995
This is a reply to # 1,891,589Implication of joblessness as a symptom of drug use and screen failure. This lumps all and/or most unemployed in the drug user class.
The article does state in the middle that LESS THAN 1% are positive for drugs. Then it jumps around the numbers and does not get really anywhere. - No use for drugs in the workplace...... Corey
13 y
1,102
This is a reply to # 1,891,589I worked 40+ years in construction work. I worked for many employers over that time. Some required drug testing and some did not.
I had no problem with anyone using drugs if that was their choice. But I got to see how less safe the users were, for the user and his coworkers . Dangerous situations seemed to be funny to some users, and I did see some users get hurt badly. Some of the drugs seemed to change personalities and some I was genuinely afraid to be around. Afraid for my own safety. Some I would flat refuse to work around if they were using. Pot never seemed to be a problem, other than the stench. I did eventually get to the point that I would not work for an employer that did not drug test.
Now on the lighter side:
I helped build a courthouse in a small town. Sheriff's office was a block away.
With fairly regularity they would burn the pot that was confiscated and the whole town would have a strong smell. The entire town would get a mild high. If they had drug tested there, the courthouse would have never been built. And when I would get home my family would ask what the strange smell was.
- its pot trapper/kcmo
13 y
994
Share:
Translate This Page: