Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2009
do you mean the 'p' word....sorry....ive been in ireland for years and that is seen as a neutral term there...it is the 'nacker' word they object to there...apologies...actually, i am going to do scrapping with travelling folk as i know some and there is money in scrap again, in these hard times....
Posts: 7
Threads: 3
Joined: Mar 2009
kevin - what you say about legality of dissmisal only applies if it is already in your current contract - if it is not in your current contract, then grindlecat is correct
clearly getting in pissed in ones lunch break does not qualify as 'on ones own time' as the individual would be returning to work within the effective period of teh alcohol they had consumed....
Your suggestion that any body who uses a 'illegal' drug has some kind of problem that needs treatment is deeply offensive and ignorant...
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2009
am i right? bloody hell! thats a rarity, on here,....have to have another codiene to celebrate
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Mar 2010
I am currently working on a big infrastructure project where testing of everyone for alcohol and drugs was carried out at end of the (extremely long) site induction. We also have random testing, and a number of people have been refused entry to site for testing positive (easily done as the site alcohol limit is 1/4 of the drink drive limit, and we've been told that we shouldn't drink within 8 hours of starting work, and that we can only have 2 drinks within 16 hours of starting - there goes a sneaky midweek catch up with my mates). As one of only two women in a room full of guys (some of them making sniggering comments about our ability to wee into a cup), the experience wasn't all that pleasant, but I still think I would prefer to go through that than the alternative I've witnessed on some sites, where I've found stashes of empty cans of white lightning in the basement (I raised the issue with the construction site manager, he shrugged his shoulders and said they must have come from before they started on site - not given the stench coming from the labourers on site!).
I think my main gripe is that I am not really happy about this sort of testing being carried out by a third party who is not my employer. I feel I have little or no control over what they chose to do with that information, and it is difficult to find out. I am fed up of being asked at inductions for my NI number and other personal information - surely this is my employer's responsibility and not that of the company running the site? If random testing was carried out by my employer, surely that would also fit better into a clear company drugs/alcohol policy, which the main contractor could then satisfy themselves was in place? Given the case recently where certain major contractors were found to be circulating blacklists of perceived troublemakers I do not trust them with this sort of information.
Grindlecat, we were also given one story at the induction about a guy who tested positive for Codeine, who had been taking too many painkillers for several weeks but didn't realise until he had the drugs test that this was doing serious damage to his health!
Posts: 6,009
Threads: 2
Joined: Mar 2017
Stripey Wrote:I think my main gripe is that I am not really happy about this sort of testing being carried out by a third party who is not my employer. I feel I have little or no control over what they chose to do with that information, and it is difficult to find out. I am fed up of being asked at inductions for my NI number and other personal information - surely this is my employer's responsibility and not that of the company running the site? If random testing was carried out by my employer, surely that would also fit better into a clear company drugs/alcohol policy, which the main contractor could then satisfy themselves was in place?
I think this is indeed the nub of it... The company should have a drugs policy
its not hard.... here is a template
http://stepchangeinsafety.net/ResourceFi...cument.doc
So if you are a company and you don't have one... jsut download and find and replace.
If you are subject to testing, then ask the company for a copy of their policy...
Posts: 2
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2006
..............I recall a few years back when the site staff of 25 were threatened with drug testing .and 21 of them were dope smokers..needless to say ground was stood and no testing was done.................
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2005
GnomeKing Wrote:kevin - what you say about legality of dissmisal only applies if it is already in your current contract - if it is not in your current contract, then grindlecat is correct
.....Your suggestion that any body who uses a 'illegal' drug has some kind of problem that needs treatment is deeply offensive and ignorant...
Well I did say in my second sentence 'breaking the terms and conditions of your contract' so the infernece was that the contract contained a non-drug/non-alcohol clause......and in my final sentence I did try to empahsise the subjectivity of drug and alcohol use by placing the word 'problem' inside apostrophes. Believe me I am the most liberal and as far I am aware the least ignorant of folk (as many BAJRites who know me personally will testify), when it comes to the crux I care not one jot what chemicals persons freely use about their persons.....so don't feel the need to be deeply offended on my behalf
With peace and consolation hath dismist, And calm of mind all passion spent...
Posts: 7
Threads: 3
Joined: Mar 2009
fair enough kevin...i recant
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Jun 2006
2nd March 2010, 07:35 PM
(This post was last modified: 2nd March 2010, 07:38 PM by Geli.)
And sometimes some people can be bothered to get off their arses and try and do something about things they consider important, rather than make glib remarks. You may find testing acceptable but some people don't. It may be of more practical use if you actually looked at the issue and voiced an opinion based on that! It's not about whether people do drugs or not it's about invasion of privacy!
Posts: 0
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2005
This subject, all personal arguments aside, is a very interesting one on a subject I posted on previously whilst working on a pipeline project.
And it is very easy to see all sides of this argument - it does weigh disproportinately on cannabis smokers but rightly or wrongly (and wrongly in my opinion) it is an illegal activity and by indulging in it recreationaly you do open yourself up for problems.
This seems to boil down to those who use cannabis wishing to conceal it from thier employers and others - the in the privacy of my own home agrument and whether or not they are entitled to do this.
As the drug is illegal no-one can just actually come out and say this in thier defense and state it as a reason to not be tested and the tired old invasion of privacy argument has to be brought out. But how do you fight something when by doing it you incriminate yourself?
Alcohol and Drug Testing in the Workplace.
