+- BAJR Federation Archaeology (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk)
+-- Forum: BAJR Federation Forums (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=3)
+--- Forum: The Site Hut (http://www.bajrfed.co.uk/forumdisplay.php?fid=7)
+--- Thread: drugs testing (/showthread.php?tid=2250)
drugs testing - drpeterwardle - 20th June 2006
I would note a number of things:
The nations heritage is looked after by a variety of professions and people not just archaeologists for example architects and historic building conservation specialists. There are also organisation such as National Trust and English Heritage which are not purely archaeological.
It is unknown how many archaeologists are "drug aburers" and if the proportion differs from the rest of society. One person has suggested that 50% or more do participate - this is far from hard evidence or a notion of self confession.
What people do in there private lives is a matter for them provided it does not impinge on their work performance.
I have been in archaeology for over 30 years and in that time I can say I have never seen anybody smoking cannabis on site.
I thus find all statements that have been made very surprising.
Peter Wardle
drugs testing - BAJR Host - 20th June 2006
I fear the self confession would be better placed on anyone -
This is important that occasional users of cannabis, or drink... are not classed in the same group as heroin addicts.
If you took a cross section of any part of the population I think you would find the same story.
The talk on this forum does not even go as far as to say these are real stats...
If we could let this lie. I would be grateful... It is my fault for letting this go on.. I certainly do not want it to be used as 'proof' that archaeologists are staggering about sites barely able to remember why they are there......
This has been taken slightly out of context and the answer is that archaeologists act professionally.. ps... sorry about the PM system.. still some teething trouble
Another day another WSI?
drugs testing - Paul Belford - 20th June 2006
I don't honestly think that the evidence suggests 'the overall care of our nation's heritage' is in the hands of self-confessed drug abusers! I think one person made a generalisation on a specialist internet discussion forum based on their own experience. They have not supported it with facts. I doubt very much that 50% of the archaeological profession smoke pot. I have never seen anyone smoke a spliff on site.
Cannabis is just one of many drugs open to abuse, alcoholism is also a serious problem for archaeologists in my experience. Indeed would have thought that the figures for alcohol abuse by archaeologists are actually higher than those for cannabis. I would guess that abuse of both cannabis and alcohol amongst archaeologists is slightly above the national average. I would add that this is hardly surprising, given the various conditions under which we work which are often described on this forum.
I could conclude from a visit to a random transport cafe that 'the overall care of our nation's distribution network' is in danger because the high saturated fat diet and heavy smoking of 'most' lorry drivers must mean that they are all due for an imminent heart attack. Clearly this is nonsense, but I think this discussion has veered off onto that sort of level. You can also say that abuse of cocaine amongst supermodels (and radio presenters) is well above the national average. This seems to cause no end of tabloid hysteria but actually again is no great surprise.
Anyway to return to answer the original question, I personally have qualms about drug testing in general on civil liberties grounds. However I accept the need for drug testing on Health and Safety grounds under specific circumstances. This includes police tests (alcohol and drugs) for road safety reasons, as well as on-site checks on contractors.
In terms of the debate on here it has to be said that Steve-B you have been winding Troll up, and Troll you have risen to the bait.
drugs testing - tom wilson - 20th June 2006
Oi! Just leave it lads, it's not worth it.
Steve, precisely which official voice of professional archaeology is it that says over half of its members are drug abusers? I don't recognise this statistic at all, and I know quite a lot of archaeologists. All I have seen here is one rant from an anonymous source (very brave, by the way), plus a bit of anecdodage about 'something that once happened somewhere'. Personally, I doubt that drug use among archaeologists is higher than it is among plumbers, or policemen for that matter.
A few posts ago you claimed 'not to take statistics that have been bandied about on this thread seriously unless substantiated with hard proof'. Have you changed your mind, or are you just intent on causing trouble?
As for you Troll, calm down mate, for goodness sake. It's really not worth getting all aggressive about.
drugs testing - BAJR Host - 20th June 2006
so on this and other posts... shall we recover the thread..
I agree with Paul Belfords post - I to have serious doubts about drug/alchohol testing when applied in a way that is not to protect or to fulfil specific legal criteria.. but only in a hope to discredit archaeology.
Many people would not take the test on moral grounds... if they did take the test they would pass.. but that is not the point.. the point is whether they should be forced to take the tests...
Nobody here is condoning drugs or alchohol use, but to 'spring' this test on people without them knowing... :face-confused:
The personal choice is taken away... the suggestion is that where it constitutes a serious need... then fair enough, IF, and only IF the employee is aware PRIOR TO employment, that this is the case.
We could spread this to suggest that everyone has a DNA sample taken, that every person is barcoded...
Another day another WSI?
drugs testing - Steve-B - 20th June 2006
Quote:quote:Steve, precisely which official voice of professional archaeology is it that says over half of its members are drug abusers? I
Tom, with respect I did try to light heartedly suggest that this was not a serious statistic but Troll decided to throw his rattle out of the pram (and you might wantto check earlier posts, it wasnt me that made theludicrous claims.... which obviously indicates that I was mistaken, if there is such strong feeling on this subject perhaps it is a case of no smoke without fire.....
http://www.detector-distribution.co.uk
For all your detecting needs.
drugs testing - BAJR Host - 20th June 2006
One last time people
This is not an issue about drug using archaeologists.. to suggest otherwise is wholy misleading.. Troll (if I am right) was annoyed about the suggestion that archaeologists are drug users on a large scale.
I do not want to stifle debate, but this thread is turning into a surreal escalation ... so... take it from me, that I have not seen archaeologists taking drugs of any sort on a site. To suggest otherwise is dangerous ground..
Another day another WSI?
drugs testing - 1man1desk - 21st June 2006
I think that the original point related to a requirement that staff on a particular site would be subject to compulsory drug testing if required.
This is most likely to have been a requirement of everyone on site, not just the archaeologists, so we are not being picked out as suspect.
It does seem a reasonable requirement where people are working in a dangerous environment, such as a major construction site. One person under the influence could endanger many others as well as themselves. I think it is now quite common. However, I think it is less frequently actually applied - the idea is that just knowing you could be tested is an incentive to behave.
I have worked in archaeology for 22 years, and never been aware of someone using drugs on site. However, I have (years ago) been aware of people who used drugs off site and were likely to be affected on site the next day. But, I don't believe this is any more common in archaeology than in society at large, taking into account the age profile of site staff.
1man1desk
to let, fully furnished
drugs testing - Wanderingape - 21st June 2006
Although I disagree with breaching civil liberties in such a way, if random tests is what it takes to prove to the mainstream and any other knockers of archaeology and archaeologists that we're not a bunch of hippies fighting for something that has no relevence to the rest of the world then BRING IT ON and lets put these ignorant ba****ds to rest.
Excuse my rant but ive been taking s**t off random suits and other arrogant t**ts who think we're employed to get in their way or act as some kind of poorly payed amusement for their slimy, brylcream-coated asses!
I dont believe that the percentage of ganja smokers is higher within archaeology, I think that stereotypes and preconceptions determine that we would be viewed as stoners, just like surfers, students and/ or people who listen to Jack Johnson (poor examples i know
!). It would be like me saying that every high powered businessman in London is now snorting lines of coke and every person in Glasgow has got their belts off ready to shoot up!Complete crap fed to us by Hollywood and other media sources but those are the stereotypes that people have and if it takes regulated and well-implemented drug testing to dispel this, then I know myself and many others would welcome it.
drugs testing - Emjem - 22nd June 2006
I have to agree with wandering, stereotypes never do anyone any favours, ideas get confused, people (and professions) get pigeon-holed, and i for one am not a dr.marten wearing personage or a member of the great unwashed, lets get this straight, we are no longer in the 1980's... Yes people have the freedom of choice, but if its illegal, don't do it in front of me and don't expect me to work next to you, i'd be first in the queue for a test, ive got nothing to hide...[:I]