Urine testing

by Eric Skidmore

1. Drug-free workplace act only pertains to on the job drug use. Off the
job behavior modification impinges on rights to privacy. Employer has no
authority to act as police.

2. Testing does not determine current impairment, only past drug use.
Inactive metabolite of marijuana, THC, stays in urine up to 30 days. This
constitutes a search for deviance not dys-function. (Morgan, J., 1988) If
employers want behavior modification of a person's entire life, they should
pay their employees for 24 hours. Henry Ford tried to control his worker's
personal work habits 24 hours per day. This kind of abuse was one of the
reasons the United Auto Workers came to be. Labor today is losing its
power because of this invasion of privacy. Supreme Court Justice Scalia
has called drug testing a "needless indignity."

3. Up to 90% of all positive tests are for marijuana, the least dangerous
of drugs. Many common prescription drugs cause greater impairment than
Cannabis. "No clear relationship has ever been demonstrated between
marijuana smoking and either seriously impaired driving performance or the
risk of accident involvement...there is little if any evidence to indicate
that drivers who have used marijuana alone are any more likely to cause
serious accidents than drug free drivers." ( Robbe, O'Hanlon, NHTSA study,
1993.) Urine testing advocates are quick to criticise marijuana without any
evidence to support their hysterical, anecdotal claims. Excessive
overtime, sickness, and lack of sleep causes impairment but there is no
test for that!

4. Questionable accuracy of tests, false positives, potential corruption
in lab work, chain-of-custody problems, mistakes. Employers and employees
have been known to bribe labs. Hand-eye co-ordination tests for impairment
would be more accurate.

5. There is no evidence to show the tests are very good at detecting drug
use or dependence. The deterrent effects of drug testing have never been
clearly proven. Urine testing catches everyone. No evidence that
occasional use reduces productivity
(Committee of the National Research Council and Institute of Medicine)

6. In some studies people who tested positive for marijuana had more
promotions, less absenteeism, and used fewer medical benefits. (Parish,
1989).

7. Hidden Agenda. It may seem astonishing that so many employers
instituted drug testing without any evidence that it would be cost
effective. Could it be that employers may use drug testing to maintain a
compliant work force that's afraid to speak out on safety issues or other
grievances? If someone gets out of line threaten them with a drug test.
The drug war has become a call to patriotism to hide the policy of social
repression with employers drafted as loyal soldier-robots. Would the
threat of drug testing serve to silence people about other issues like
legalization?

8. Productivity loss due to drug use. Advocates of urine testing claim
that illicit drug usage amounts to over $1,000 per worker per year or about
$100 billion annually. Yet the figure turns out to be plucked out of
mid-air. (Research Triangle Institute, 1984) Young people who had ever
used marijuana daily had an income 28% lower than average, yet among
current users of any illicit drug there was no decrease in income! Does
this mean if you stop using illicit drugs your income will decline? Would
urine testing cause a decrease in income?


INDEX

HOME