I don't have any reason to fear a drug test but I would feel personally violated. After all, it's my personal DNA. If they can't tell what my demeanor is on the job and they have to put it under a microscope then they must not be a very good judge. And no, I don't drive for a living, LOL!

My former employer (before I retired) would have probably suspended someone who refused a test.

I know of 2 employees who failed it (pot both times I think) and they were given time off, and had to take some sort of classes. The one had gone to her 25th class reunion, and had smoked with some of her old friends. She wasn't a smoker otherwise, as she had her CDL and was subject to testing at any time. One time, and she got caught.

Sue

Here is my opinion...if someone isn't doing their job correctly then fire them. If someone is doing their job then leave them alone. I personally don't think it's an employers business what an employee does away from work. The only exceptions I could see would be something like an airline pilot. Drug tests don't work well for their intended purpose for alot of reasons, someone who occasionally smokes pot would be fired and the raging alcoholic who drinks before work would be spared. Also, many, many addiction problems are with legal medications. I think it's an infringement on personal rights. If someone is acting like they are drunk or on drugs at work and aren't doing their job, fire them, plain and simple.

I think if I worked as a clerk in a store, drug testing is not important and I would not allow it. If I worked in a security area or in a drug warehouse, munitions plant, etc., I would take a test without a protest.

I'm a flight attendant and have been drug tested for years. We get tested after flying our trip and it adds a lot of time to an already long day. Drugs are not a problem in the airline industry. Alcohol abuse and fatigue from extra long days are the main safety issues. We also can be given a breathalyzer at any time. I feel it's a violation but I don't have a choice.
Donna

My employer told me there would/could be random drug testing when I was hired, 28 years ago ... and I accepted the position. As long as we both knew, going into the employer/employee relationship, that drug testing would occur from time to time, then there should be no problems from anyone.

I don't understand how it's a violation. If I were selected seven times out of seven, I might feel that way ... but if it's truely random testing, then all employees are treated equally.

I had a job where federally mandated drug/alcohol testing was required. It was random except if you'd previously tested dirty and had returned to work after treatment.
Refusing to be tested was immediate suspension with termination pending. I had a public safety sensitive job.

If an employer has a reason to request a test it's called 'reasonable suspicion'.

If an employer does random testing, then you were notified of that either when you were hired or when the program started, if it started after you were hired. If they started it during your employment, it's likely they gave everyone 30 days notice that they were now included in a random program.

In either situation - reasonable suspicion or random - a positive test is cause for immediate termination. A refusal is deemed to be the same thing as a positive test and is cause for immediate termination.

If you have a problem and you come forward to ask for help, help is arranged through the Employee Assistance Program. This does not result in termination, but there is random testing for 12 months.

Admitting to drug use and asking for help only after you are notified of a pending test would be too late.

BTW, you don't 'ignore' a request for a random drug screen. You either do it or you refuse it.

"...if I worked as a clerk in a store..." - theft is a major issue in retail and is tied to drug use (it's expensive!) probably more often than you think. Many retail corporations do drug screens during the pre-employment process, after injuries and for reasonable suspicion. Some even do random testing for those employees who handle a lot of cash.

When I worked in the jewelry stores we were subject to random tests, and I was tested before I was hired. I was also tested before I was hired at the college and am still subejct to random testing there.

As an employer my hiring notice states that you will be subject to random testing and failure to comply with it is grounds for immediate dismissal. My staff works with client credit card information, I must be able to trust them.

I work for a major hospital and was told when I started that all employees are subject to a random test. Not a problem since I've been clean since 2002, but in 2 years I have yet to have one. I am a firm believer that ones private life is there own, but in my field the employees have access to alot of narcotics. 3 long time nurses were just fired for stealing drugs recently and maybe it could have been avoided if the hospital would have done tests more frequently. My beef is that these nurses were stealing from the patients who were truly in pain and were given Tylenol instead of their pain meds.

I have to agree, there is no such thing as a random drug test beign ignored, it is not ignored, it is either done or refused, period. When hired you know you are going to be random drug tested. Statement on hire document probably states "Refusal to take test means immediate termination", just need to go back and read hiring paperwork. Besides, most work now days is "AT WILL". If not terminated for that, you are at will..either party can terminate employment at anytime for any reason...or no reason at all. ANd in today's economy, unless you have a skill that is very high in demand, I personally wouldn't test that.

Vickey-MN

I don't care - I'll pee in the cup anytime my employer asks.

Another benefit of being retired ...

.. all that I need do in order to qualify for my pension cheque is ...

... stay topside the grass (you know - the kind that my landlord grows to install around new houses).

ole joyfilled