Unit VIII Journal

1

Article Review on Drug Testing

Arie McQuarley

CSU

16 Oct 2022

Introduction

Drug testing is the process of testing a person's bodily fluids to determine whether or how much drugs the person has consumed. Employer drug testing has become a controversial issue because most people believe that it violates an individual's right to privacy. Essentially, this means that people have a right to not have their bodily functions scrutinized without their consent. Currently, there are two main methods of drug testing: urine and blood. Although there are several ethical considerations regarding drug testing, the tests themselves are relatively simple and inexpensive.

Body

One of the major legal battles regarding drug testing is the one that is currently taking place in California. In this case, an administrative judge ruled that the Department of Transportation (DOT) could not suspend 4C14&039;s job without his consent. The judge cited federal laws protecting an employee's right to privacy when he took a drug test. This case highlights the fact new laws protecting employee privacy have recently been passed in Congress. Therefore, it is encouraging to see legal precedents being set in favor of employee rights (Reidenberg & Schaub, 2018).

The author in this article states that employers are using electronic devices to increase workplace productivity and decrease operational costs. For this reason, they may establish a company drug testing policy as a way of achieving these goals. However, this process can be morally challenging when an individual's right to privacy is considered. It seems unethical to force someone to forfeit his rights for the sake of efficiency. This is why some people oppose drug testing unless it relates directly to performance at work.

Besides, according to this article, is possible that job applicants will have no choice but to submit to drug testing if they want employment. Employers may use this as a means of preventing worker sabotage or ensuring safe working conditions for their clients. Unfortunately, this may lead to an increase in cases of proven bodily harm or wrongful dismissal among those who are unemployed but forced into drug testing by their current job applications.

As previously stated, current laws protect individual rights when it comes down to drug testing at work. However, new legal precedents set in favor of privacy may soon make this practice illegal once again. Employer cost cutting measures may prove ineffective when trying to increase employee productivity and minimize costs through drug testing programs. Therefore, it would behoove employers and employees alike to rethink this practice before any new legal challenges allow such scrutiny in even stricter measures against privacy rights violations (Terzano, S. P. (2018).

Drug testing is an important part of the safety and wellness programs of many organizations. The process helps employers screen job applicants for drug use and identify users in the workplace. It can also help employers punish users and recover from the negative effects of drug use in the workplace. However, not every person believes that drug testing is ethical. Employers should follow strict policies, but they should also take steps to ensure that their employees feel respected and have a fair opportunity for employment(Jensen & Breindahl, 2019).

Conclusion

Drug testing is an important aspect of maintaining workplace safety and productivity. Some believe it's an invasion of privacy if workers are tested, but others consider it necessary to protect both workers and customers from dangerous drugs on the job. Employers need to find ways to test people who show potential signs of drug use without offending those who have been tested positive in the past or are currently testing positive for drugs on the job. This way, they can protect both their employees and customers from dangerous drugs at work and at home.

References

Reidenberg, J. R., & Schaub, F. (2018). Achieving big data privacy in education.  Theory and Research in Education,  16(3), 263-279.

Terzano, S. P. (2018). Another Opportunity for the California Supreme Court to Correct the Lower Court's Application of Hill's Privacy Test. Lewis v. Superior Court, 397 P. 3d 1011 (Cal. 2017).  Rutgers UL Rev.,  71, 1359.

Jensen, C. M., & Breindahl, T. (2019). Patients in medical treatment for attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD): Are they at risk in drug screening?.  ADHD Attention Deficit and Hyperactivity Disorders,  11(3), 333-340.