Urine tests for welfare recipients

[classicman]

For your information, as a commodity, the price of eggs in China is directly related to the wuantity of booze/illegal substances that medical professionals and/or Tanker truck drivers consume in a given period of time - It's a fact - jsut ask lookout!

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

I've seen plenty of drunk docs...waited on them at the club. They weren't doctoring. The lawyers weren't lawyering. The business owners weren't business ownering. The gold pros weren't golf proing.

more often than not ...you tickle me funny bone.

[Aliantha]

An employer has the right to put whatever conditions he wants on the people he employs. If he says they have to wear pink shirts with yellow polkadots once a week, or run around the block twice a day that's up to him. If you accept a job with conditions, it's up to you do deal with it or get sacked.

Making people take urine tests to get their welfare check will eventually happen whether you like it or not, and so it should. Particularly those on unemployment with no good reason to not be looking for a job. They shouldn't be getting high. They should be spending every moment of the work hour day working towards getting a job. If they choose not to do so, they can go mooch off someone else who loves them more. That's my opinion.

[Cicero]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

An employer has the right to put whatever conditions he wants on the people he employs.

No. No.
I'll have to start calling you Ebeneezer Scrooge? You don't want those Christmas ghosts to come 'a haunting do you Ali?

[Aliantha]

Well as has been stated previously, if you don't like the conditions, then don't work for the man. It's pretty simple really.

Here's an example. There's this guy down the street who'll pay me $600/week and all I have to do is dig ditches all day. That's all I have to do. The only problem is, I don't think I'd like to dig ditches every day, so I don't think I'll take that job.

There's this other guy who says he'll pay me $600/week to sit on my arse and do nothing. Sounds like a good idea. The only thing is, I can't drink or get high while I'm doing it. Hmmm...but I like drinking and getting high and the guy who's making me dig ditches doesn't care how high I am as long as I dig ditches. That sounds like a better deal to me.

There's this other guy who'll pay me $800/week to dig ditches, but I also have to submit to a urine sample once a week. That's a lot of money. Maybe it's worth not getting high and drinking every day...

It's a matter of priorities.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by monster

As for refusing welfare to people who fail, what are you going to do with them? Build a bigger wall round your property and employ more guards to keep then from robbing you to fund their "habit"? Or divert the welfare into a worthwhile rehab program? what?

Divert the money to sniper schools.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

An employer has the right to put whatever conditions he wants on the people he employs. If he says they have to wear pink shirts with yellow polkadots once a week, or run around the block twice a day that's up to him. If you accept a job with conditions, it's up to you do deal with it or get sacked.

Making people take urine tests to get their welfare check will eventually happen whether you like it or not, and so it should. Particularly those on unemployment with no good reason to not be looking for a job. They shouldn't be getting high. They should be spending every moment of the work hour day working towards getting a job. If they choose not to do so, they can go mooch off someone else who loves them more. That's my opinion.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Shawnee123

You are cracking me UP! Do you think your doc gets drug tested? And what does this have to do with the price of eggs in China again?

I've seen plenty of drunk docs...waited on them at the club. They weren't doctoring. The lawyers weren't lawyering. The business owners weren't business ownering. The gold pros weren't golf proing.

Be sure to divide out alcohol abuse from drug abuse. Yes many hospitals require physicians to take drug tests as a condition of employment and they can require them to take one if they are suspected of abusing drugs. There was a time that a greater degree of alcohol abuse may have been tolerated, like in the 1970's, but those times are gone. Acute alcohol intoxication is much harder to cover up in the work place, drug abuse is much easier to cover up as tolerances increase. Any provider who smelled of alcohol would be immediately rated out by an employee. Drug abusers are much harder to discover and deal with. Drug testing only covers some of the available drugs which can be abused in the hospital setting.

[Cicero]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

Well as has been stated previously, if you don't like the conditions, then don't work for the man. It's pretty simple really.

Here's an example. There's this guy down the street who'll pay me $600/week and all I have to do is dig ditches all day. That's all I have to do. The only problem is, I don't think I'd like to dig ditches every day, so I don't think I'll take that job.

There's this other guy who says he'll pay me $600/week to sit on my arse and do nothing. Sounds like a good idea. The only thing is, I can't drink or get high while I'm doing it. Hmmm...but I like drinking and getting high and the guy who's making me dig ditches doesn't care how high I am as long as I dig ditches. That sounds like a better deal to me.

There's this other guy who'll pay me $800/week to dig ditches, but I also have to submit to a urine sample once a week. That's a lot of money. Maybe it's worth not getting high and drinking every day...

It's a matter of priorities.

There are laws against any conditions....

Your examples are pretty mild. Intentionally? Yes.....

I am in the middle of seeing unfair and possibly illegal work practices as we speak. People have already quit making the jobs of people working here even more difficult, they can quit, but not litigate or have their day in court. Or even have anyone to file a complaint with. Because the boss can get away with it and does.....exploitation of workers is what I'm talking about.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Cicero

...exploitation of workers is what I'm talking about.

Congress has made that situation more possible over the last 20 years. Each administration has favored different industries and provided protections which have eaten away at the rights of the workers. I don't see much changing in the near future.

[Cicero]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Congress has made that situation more possible over the last 20 years. Each administration has favored different industries and provided protections which have eaten away at the rights of the workers. I don't see much changing in the near future.

More possible in some ways yes. Nothing changes until a union happens or there is a lawsuit. If you don't see anything changing then you probably aren't trying.

The situation becomes more complex when I have to rely on the masses alongside myself to demand fair treatment, to get it. And people don't care for the idea or want it. (judging from some of the opinions here) It disturbs me when I think of what people had to do to get fair wages and any sense of human rights at the workplace or any compensation when injured.

A lot of you have kids here. I wonder what opinion you would have if you saw your child working under any conditions their boss wants.
heh- This includes harassment folks.....I guess we are back at square one when people revert to the old ways of thinking.

[lookout123]

I don't view asking someone who wants a job working for me (with my files, with my clients, affecting my reputation) to take a piss test or an aptitude test or anything other kind of test, as discriminatory.

Your actions decide whether you will pass a piss test, not your genes or your skin color.

Denying a job due to race, color, creed, sex, or sexual preference is descriminatory. Expecting prospective employees to pass a urine test is not. Honestly, if you aren't smart enough to clean up to the degree necessary to pass a urine test, you're too damn stupid to work at my company anyway.

[Aliantha]

Originally Posted by Cicero

There are laws against any conditions....

Your examples are pretty mild. Intentionally? Yes.....

Right, so if a condition of being a teacher is that you have a certain qualification and you don't happen to have that qualification, you should still be able to have the job even though you're not qualified? The point is, if an employer tells you prior to commencement of employment that you have to do a, b, & c in order to keep your job and you accept those conditions, then your only recourse is to resign if, after a period of time, you decide you don't like the conditions.

I am in the middle of seeing unfair and possibly illegal work practices as we speak. People have already quit making the jobs of people working here even more difficult, they can quit, but not litigate or have their day in court. Or even have anyone to file a complaint with. Because the boss can get away with it and does.....exploitation of workers is what I'm talking about.

If people quit and there's not enough people to do the job and you don't like it, it's not your fault, but you don't get to sue the boss because you don't like it. You get to go find yourself another job that suits you better.

I don't get the whole idea behind blaming the boss for other people's decisions. It's probably pissing him off too you know.

[Cicero]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

If people quit and there's not enough people to do the job and you don't like it, it's not your fault, but you don't get to sue the boss because you don't like it.

That's not the illegal part.....drrrr.:p

I profoundly dislike things all the time that aren't illegal (oh I wish). That's not what I'm talking about. But hey, thank you for signing up, but I just said that there are illegal things going (verifiable)on and I have full rights not to like those things too. Hey they're illegal and I don't like them....as opposed to the legal things I like and the illegal things I like. And of course the legal things I don't like.

Bosses still should not be allowed to make people work under any conditions which is why we have lots of laws in place now.
Siiiiimple.

You didn't say reasonable conditions. You said "any conditions". Which is completely different.

[Aliantha]

What any conditions are you talking about? You're not making any sense.