Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Drug Testing for Employees

my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

»	Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE » Operations » Ground Level » Drug Testing for Employees (Page 2)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Author

Topic: Drug Testing for Employees

Don Anderson
Master Film Handler

Posts: 312
From: West Bend, WI, USA
Registered: Mar 2000

posted 03-14-2005 05:44 PM

No drug testing here. We have fired an assistant manager and concession worker for selling pot on the grounds. I recall that a few years back having a concession employee meeting a "friend" in the restroom. We knew they were selling pot, so I had mentioned that the corporate office was starting Drug Testing for all employees, two days later one of them gave his two week notice. The other quit a few weeks later. I don't care what an employee does on their own time, but they better not show up under the influence. I have one employee that always comes in to see a movie with a bud, er... friend, and is high as a kite. I don't think that it is very professional of him to arrive HIGH at his work place, even if its on his own time. His days are numbered, and not because of drugs. I guess that drugs are just a part of everyday life for teens. They can always get another job and don't seem to be too worried about getting canned. Oh well. I'm no angel. [Roll Eyes]

| IP: Logged

William Hooper
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1879
From: Mobile, AL USA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 03-15-2005 02:19 AM

I agree with James, & the only substance I abuse is gasoline.

Except for the transportation industry & some others where public safety is critically concerned, I think that drug testing is stupid &/or abusive.

What, gonna drug screen projectionist applicants so you don't get one whose work will be affected, resulting in out-of-frame splices & scratched prints?

All that's taken care of in just firing those who can't fulfill the requirements of the job.

The argument that they'll be more likely to steal is idiotic, too. People not under the influence steal. They may not fire the incompetent or destructively negligent, but Mike Spaeth & Jim Zeigler will have a thief under the bright light in an instant.

| IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 03-15-2005 11:56 AM

Even in transportation, I think drug testing is abusive and not particularly effective. In college my most famous (or infamous) research paper was an argument against drug testing for professional pilots (which was just starting at the time), citing the numerous problems for pilots that test "false positive", something that happens more often than it should. The list included things like the stigma and suspicion that come with a failed test result (even when that test result later turns out to be false), or the fact that a pilot gets several weeks of unpaid "vacation" until a negative test result can be verified, assuming he doesn't automatically get fired first.

Instead, I advocated the use of duty-fitness testing at the time of check-in. Essentially the worker plays a video game that measures the accuracy and timeliness of his responses, calibrated against his usual responses to the game. Fail it and you don't work that day. The beauty of it is it doesn't falsely label you with the tag of "suspected drug user". It just says that for whatever reason you're having a bad day that day. No lengthy grounding while waiting for a lab to verify test results. At the time, some progressive companies (like the San Diego Trolly Company) were using this kind of testing with good results.

Obviously no one in the FAA or the air transportation industry bought my arguments. But I'm used to that. [Wink]

| IP: Logged

James R. Hammonds, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 931
From: Houston, TX, USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 03-15-2005 11:58 AM

quote: Don Anderson
I guess that drugs are just a part of everyday life for teens.

Well, it's not limited to teens.
That's a pretty unfair stereotype if you think about it.

| IP: Logged

David Stambaugh
Film God

Posts: 4021
From: Eugene, Oregon
Registered: Jan 2002

posted 03-15-2005 12:02 PM

quote: Paul Mayer
At the time, some progressive companies (like the San Diego Trolly Company) were using this kind of testing with good results.

By "good results", do you mean they were consistently at least as accurate as random drug screening? If this kind of testing is not also accompanied by a drug screen when someone "fails", how would there be any way to know if the testing is effective?

| IP: Logged

Paul Mayer
Oh get out of it Melvin, before it pulls you under!

Posts: 3836
From: Albuquerque, NM
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 03-15-2005 02:02 PM

Not sure, can't remember enough about their program now to comment (that paper was written in 1992, and I've since lost both it and all of my original notes). At the time they were on record as being very satisfied with their testing program. Wish I could remember which medical journal I used for the citation--it might have been JAMA. I was looking for any published comments on the efficacy of random drug testing, obviously looking specifically for instances that supported my arguments for alternatives.

All a moot point now anyway--SDTI now uses drug testing, as required by the FTA. They also immediately terminate any employee that tests positive during the random checks, which is typical transportation industry practice.

| IP: Logged

William Hooper
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1879
From: Mobile, AL USA
Registered: Jun 99

posted 03-16-2005 03:04 AM

quote: James R. Hammonds, Jr
Well, it's not limited to teens.
That's a pretty unfair stereotype if you think about it.

Agreed, & up towards the top of social respectability which by the nature of achieving the position takes a time that moves past youth, every city has a story about some DA &/or judge that showed up most days coked to the gills, drunk, otherwise out of it.

quote: Paul Mayer
Instead, I advocated the use of duty-fitness testing at the time of check-in. Essentially the worker plays a video game that measures the accuracy and timeliness of his responses, calibrated against his usual responses to the game. Fail it and you don't work that day.

That's the best functional procedure I've heard of! It weeds out people who've got no business working that day because they don't care about their performance for other reasons: the most notorious is people who don't get any sleep because of something else they wanted to do & show up dead tired & unfit for work. "Man, last night I had to go get the boat & pack up my kids, it was then too late & I didn't think the alarm clock would go off, so we just went out to eat & then came back & watched some TV before I came in. I really shouldn't be here!"

| IP: Logged

Carl Martin
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1424
From: Oakland, CA, USA
Registered: Feb 2002

posted 03-16-2005 03:47 AM

quote: David Stambaugh
By "good results", do you mean they were consistently at least as accurate as random drug screening? If this kind of testing is not also accompanied by a drug screen when someone "fails", how would there be any way to know if the testing is effective?

i think the point is that it's not a drug test at all. it's a fitness test. what really matters is whether the job can be performed safely and effectively, not whether someone has been drinking, say. (i avoided the term "drunk" because that pretty much implies impairment.)

carl

| IP: Logged

Joe Redifer
You need a beating today

Posts: 12859
From: Denver, Colorado
Registered: May 99

posted 03-16-2005 04:21 AM

quote: James R. Hammonds, Jr
Well, it's not limited to teens.

That's true! Contrary to popular belief, teens do not have a monopoly on stupidity.

| IP: Logged

James R. Hammonds, Jr
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 931
From: Houston, TX, USA
Registered: Nov 2000

posted 03-16-2005 02:04 PM

I know....many adults do drugs as well....both legal and illegal.

[ 03-17-2005, 11:49 AM: Message edited by: James R. Hammonds, Jr ]

| IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.