Urine tests for welfare recipients

[Shawnee123]

Yes it CAN be. No it should NOT be. Just because employers can, will, or want to do this doesn't make it any less an invasion of personal privacy. I am also not convinced that it isn't health insurance companies who pressure for this sort of spying. Eh, what do I care, I have nothing to hide? True for most of us...but where does it end?

[lookout123]

How is it an invasion of privacy? You are asking them for something. They are asking you for information they feel is important before providing you with that something. You can choose not to submit.

No one is holding you down and telling you to piss in a cup.

[Shawnee123]

'ere

[Shawnee123]

Large people might steal to fund their dorito habit. People with chronic illness might steal to fund their needed meds. A sex addict might steal to fund his or her need for prostitutes willing to spank them with used tires. A woman with a sick kid might steal to get the best medical care for her child. A pet lover might steal so they can build a kennel to board all the strays. Where does it end again?

In other words, I don't find your argument very compelling. It is what it is, but my very humble opinion is to stay out of my life unless I fuck up, Big Brother, but thanks for trying to protect us all.

[lookout123]

the difference between your examples and the others is that there are actually profiles that indicate behavior A has an increased correlation with outcome B, so it is something to watch.

I didn't say I LIKE it, I am just pointing out that no one is forcing you to take the job or the money. You can say no. Just be aware that if you say no, they should be able to withhold the job or money. IMO.

Then again, I'm the guy that started my own company cuz I was tired of their BS.

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Supposedly alcohol abuse is much worse among welfare recipients anyway.

I thought your link dispelled that myth. Maybe I just cherry picked the info? * shrug*

I liked that link btw. After my initial 'I like that idea' thought my second thought was 'it probably won't happen because as a country we bend over backwards to help the disadvantaged even when testing could be cost effective'.So Clodfobbles link answered many of those questions for me. It wrote that most people are truthful during a paper quiz and say whether they are drug addicts or not. Paper quizes are more cost effective that urine tests.

good link clodfobble

[Shawnee123]

We mostly agree, cousin: we agree that it is done and we don't like it.

However, I could go a bit further and point out that there could probably be more studies (profiles) done as to what motivates someone to rip off a company: drug and alcohol addiction just gets the attention as the most prominent, and the one most looked at by insurance companies as well. For all we REALLY know, every single perv who likes to be beat with rubber tires by prostitutes could be 100% predisposed to steal money to support that habit.

[lookout123]

drug and alcohol addiction just gets the attention as the most prominent

My guess is that gambling ranks higher. but drug and alcohol abuse are easier to spot. Plug the holes you can, you know?

[Shawnee123]

Well, if you believe in my health/life insurance theory, gambling doesn't usually result in poor health (unless Guido nails your knees to the floor) therefore negating the company's interest in that activity until something actually does get stolen.

[lookout123]

health/insurance companies working with employers for that purpose? nah. Do you know why your insurance choices change every couple years?

The broker for the big plans makes HUGE money in the year that a contract is signed with an employer. Unfortunately the companies aren't very smart and they pay very very small trails. The BROKER creates teh relationship with the employer and then comes back every year to review the arrangement. It costs the company nothing and the broker makes full commission every year. The insurance company doesn't actually have much to do with the employers they work with.

[TheMercenary]

Bottom line, you don't want to piss in the cup quit. Employers have every right to secure their job place and protect the public from errors that could be caused by drug use in the work place.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Bottom line, you don't want to piss in the cup quit. Employers have every right to secure their job place and protect the public from errors that could be caused by drug use in the work place.

So they should give an IQ test, too? How about a driving test? Test for alcohol? Diabetics have been known to act eratically if their sugar sky rockets - better get a hemogloin a1-c on everybody. And how can you test for asshole?

What I do in my spare time is none of my employer's business until it effects my performance at work.

[Undertoad]

Employers have every right to secure their job place and protect the public from errors that could be caused by drug use in the work place.

Drug testing is not an effective way for employers to do that.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Drug testing is not an effective way for employers to do that.

I think it is if you are driving a tanker truck filled with gas at 65 mph down the interstate. I think it is if you are flying a multimillion dollar aircraft with 200 people on board over any major city. I think it is if you are expected to have 100% of your mind on what you are doing and if you don't someone may be injured or killed. But hey it's just my opinion... Oh that and the opinion of many major companies and the Federal government.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Spexxvet

So they should give an IQ test, too? How about a driving test? Test for alcohol? Diabetics have been known to act eratically if their sugar sky rockets - better get a hemogloin a1-c on everybody. And how can you test for asshole?

What I do in my spare time is none of my employer's business until it effects my performance at work.

Not according to many employers.