Re:Trading privacy for survival is another tax on the poor
by pavel_lishin on Monday March 18, 2019 @12:27PM
(#19422510)
It seems like they're typically jobs where the employee has a high chance of either being injured, or causing a lot of damage.
Re:Trading privacy for survival is another tax on the poor
by asark on Monday March 18, 2019 @02:47PM
(#19423898)
My understanding is it's an insurance thing. As in, the owners' insurance rates would be crazy-high if they didn't drug test (at least) anyone operating machinery.
Re:Trading privacy for survival is another tax on the poor
by danans on Monday March 18, 2019 @01:13PM
(#19422940)
Yes, that's probably a good generalization of the type of job that requires it - and "causing a lot of damage" even captures the case of high-skilled jobs that require security clearances.
I'd offer a different take: they are required often for skilled manufacturing jobs, like for people operating precision or dangerous machinery.
I've seen many anecdotes where factory owners say that they can't find workers for machine operator positions who don't test positive for meth or opioids.
It's also possible that some of those employers are using drug tests as a sort of "morality" bar, but I'd bet they primarily want to protect their expensive capital equipment and their other non drug using employees from potential drug-use related accidents.
But I doubt there is a lot of drug testing for burger flipping or grocery bagging type jobs, especially not in a tight labor market as exists today.