The Instigator
Kbelle23
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Luma
Pro (for)
Winning
1 Points

Random employee drug testing - Good or bad business practice?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Luma
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/15/2016 Category: Economics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 384 times Debate No: 86605
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

Kbelle23

Con

The employee does not owe their employer a clean urine sample. Either they do the job they were hired to do to their employer's satisfaction, or they don't.
Luma

Pro

I accept this debate.

I feel that, though the successful completion of the job is important, it's also important that the employees reflect well on the company. One way they can do this is by being drug free. And, if the employers standards are a drug-free work force and environment, the employees should be expected to live up to these standards, as well as the standards for the work itself.
Debate Round No. 1
Kbelle23

Con

Putting a higher importance on company standards over the employees private interests is quite audacious of the employer. The fact is that it's not just pilots and heart surgeons submitting to random drug tests, it's also grocery store clerks, cooks, janitors, etc. Companies aren't drug-testing for a "good cause", they're drug-testing because they have the authority to.

Employees who legally take prescription narcotics (those with any sense) avoid making it known to their employer and keep this personal info to themselves. Drug testing forces employees to put this personal info on the table. Employees who test positive for narcotics will be fired unless they show a valid prescription, which is thought to be confidential in most circumstances.
Luma

Pro

I believe that, if the employer requires these drug tests, they should happen. I feel that no employer would want their employees to be on any sort of illegal or mind-altering drug, regardless of the employee's position. Not only does it reflect poorly on the company, it makes them less able to do their jobs. I have to disagree, for this reason, that companies only do it because they have the authority to.

I think that medical information being given to an employer like that without permission is a violation of HIPAA, so I agree with you on that, however. Personal info like that shouldn't be put on the table, but I don't think that's what drug tests primarily seek to do.
Debate Round No. 2
Kbelle23

Con

Kbelle23 forfeited this round.
Luma

Pro

Forfeiture by my opponent. Vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by matt8800 1 year ago
matt8800
I guess I could understand the rationale behind testing for something like meth but I have no clue why marijuana would have any relevance to job performance any more than alcohol.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
Kbelle23LumaTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture