Friday, May 25, 2007

If you smoke, you can't work at Scott's

Here's another that won't hire smokers. I agree with this position. I feel that a company that insists on preplacement drug screening should follow that up with random drug screens.

However, I disagree with the use of drug screening and testing without cause in a job that requires about 3 neurons to perform, like occupying the business end of a shovel or weed-whacker. Workers Comp already excludes coverage from injuries that occur on the job in workers who are found to be positive for illegal drugs on urine screen at the time of the injuiry, so the employer is off the financial hook there.

For Heaven's sake, they have a tough, dirty job. Let them have a smoke.

Oh, and if there was a urine test to detect the fact that you consumed X beers last night or over the weekend, there would be job discrimination on that basis, too.

How about a urine test to detect cheating on tax returns? Wandering wives?

This is to advance the hypothesis that if a test exists, especially if it can be eased into a panel used for more legitimate reasons, it will be used to discriminate among potential employees, for good or evil.

No comments: