Antiseptic <" Speaking for myself, I often have a joint after lunch, but since I'm self-employed, I make the rules."

Well, that explains quite a bit now doesn't it?
Dope is well known for inducing aggression and feelings of invincibility in some people.
I hope you are a one-man business, and that you don't drive after your joint?

I believe that drug and alcohol testing only has a place in some workplaces like sporting clubs or industries that require driving as a part of the job.
However, I wonder what the rate of accidents in the mining sector was like before they introduced this mandatory testing?

Hi RObert, interesting discussion.

I would agree with testing for drugs at workplaces only if there was a very plausible, logical explanation and reasons to justify it.
I'd agree with Pelican that in some cases, it would be common sense to test for drugs (legal and illegal)- such as safety e.g. working with heavy machinery, driving.

There is no evidence that people, who have traces of drugs (e.g. marijuana) in their system perform worse than others, or that it affects the safety of a work place.
In fact, it might well be the case that drugs can increase someone's performance while not harming colleagues.

Unless there are very good common sense reasons, it should be of nobody's business what anyone chooses to put in their body, and I would see it as an intrusion, and drug testing would just be based on ideology and prejudice.

Wouldn't all this cost extra time and effort, creating more paperwork, which would factor out weak and vague reasons for drug testing such as 'better performance'.
Better performance at what... creating more admin work?

Celivia, I agree it is nobody's business what someone choooses to put into their body, provided they do it in the privacy of their own home. As I am responsible for their safety traveling to & from work, & at work, if they work for me, it then becomes very much my business.

I believe any drug testing policy, [unless set by law] should be advised before employment, but I would not, & should not be expected to, employ anyone who objected to a drug testing policy I set.

Hi Hasbeen,
"Celivia, I agree it is nobody's business what someone choooses to put into their body, provided they do it in the privacy of their own home."

Exactly, that's what I'm trying to say, too. With alcohol, it will be out of the system in a relatively short time. With marijuana, while it loses it's effect also in a short period of time, traces of it can still be detected in the body for weeks (I believe even months).
That's why I don't really understand: 'do it at home, not at work' argument.
Of course I agree with allowing people to take drugs at home and not at the workplace, I am talking about the EFFECT.
One can take a litre of whiskey at home before leaving for work... that doesn't make the action right. One should not turn up at the workplace under the influence of alcohol.

On the other hand, one can smoke a joint on say, Friday night, then the effect of the joint wears off the same night. But if that person got tested on Monday morning, traces of cannabis would still detectable, while the effects have worn off days ago.

So I really don't get how they're going to get their heads around this. Would one discipline an employee for having smoked a joint on the weekend even though there were no effects left as that person entered the workplace?

"As I am responsible for their safety traveling to & from work, & at work, if they work for me, it then becomes very much my business."

Agreed. And there is no problem if the effects have worn off from the time they leave for work.

Sorry anti not trying to be smart, actually making an effort to communicate with you.
How would you know the rate of accidents in the road transport industry?
Believe me that number is high.
In fact work cover and the other useless groups in place to keep workplaces safe do not investigate such road deaths.
No secret the transport workers union has asked for years why not, it is a workplace.
The fact is, I will never know why, drugs and grog kill and we do not hear about the involvement , just maybe it is to save surviving relatives pain.
And why get bogged down on those who use, victims can be those who die and never used anything.
I am from a family in the transport industry, understand no matter what is said drugs are more often used than not.
Is it ok to share the roads with drivers totally out of their heads? you do every day.

I'm all for it. There's plenty of jobs I've had where I've been tested for drugs. No drama with it whatsoever. Nothing worse than being in a high risk job and you're working around a forkie, truckie, crane operator, offsider, or in a couple of security jobs where they've been hungover or HANGING for their next cone while carrying a gun. Why you'd get off your face the night before work beats the hell outta me. Plus, they're unreliable as well. You're always picking up the slack of habitual drinkers and users.

Don't see how they can test visitors, however.