Welfare Drug Test?
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 15 Next
romanP @ Wed Jan 09, 2008 10:56 pm
sasquatch2 sasquatch2:
Drug testing at hiring, and radom testing after is compulsory in many professions.
Some of the masterbaiters here seem to feel themselve superior to truck drivers, who cannot have a beer after work----because they would fail a possible random test next day.
Some of the masterbaiters here seem to feel themselve superior to truck drivers, who cannot have a beer after work----because they would fail a possible random test next day.
Drug testing people who could be a very large danger to the people around them if they're intoxicated on the job is not such a bad idea. Drug testing people who work in an office, or who just have to stand for six hours, should be totally exempt.
$1:
This resistance to drug testing of welfare recipients begs the question----do they have something to hide? If a welfare recipient tests positive, this is likely why they are unemployed/unemployable.
There are quite a lot of people who are employed and use drugs, and are not likely to become unemployed anytime soon. I smoke a joint most days after work, just to cut the edge off having a crappy dead-end job. If they started piss testing, I would leave before they could put a sample jar in my hand.
Ripcat @ Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:07 pm
romanP romanP:
Well, here's the funny thing. A lot of people take stimulants on their job, and employers allow it, piss test free. Why? Because they're coffee and cigarettes! Many of these people are addicted to both, and will be unable to work if they don't have their coffee and cigarette!
Not to mention the fact that we live in an over medicated society. What about all those on anti-depressants and painkillers? These people are using at work.
romanP @ Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:12 pm
Ripcat Ripcat:
romanP romanP:
Well, here's the funny thing. A lot of people take stimulants on their job, and employers allow it, piss test free. Why? Because they're coffee and cigarettes! Many of these people are addicted to both, and will be unable to work if they don't have their coffee and cigarette!
Not to mention the fact that we live in an over medicated society. What about all those on anti-depressants and painkillers? These people are using at work.
There are also a whole host of over-the-counter drugs that people take when they have a cough or a cold that can be addictive or hallucinogenic.
mtbr @ Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:48 pm
tried them all have you?
mtbr @ Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:50 pm
romanP romanP:
Drug testing people who could be a very large danger to the people around them if they're intoxicated on the job is not such a bad idea. Drug testing people who work in an office, or who just have to stand for six hours, should be totally exempt.
There are quite a lot of people who are employed and use drugs, and are not likely to become unemployed anytime soon. I smoke a joint most days after work, just to cut the edge off having a crappy dead-end job. If they started piss testing, I would leave before they could put a sample jar in my hand.
$1:
There are quite a lot of people who are employed and use drugs, and are not likely to become unemployed anytime soon. I smoke a joint most days after work, just to cut the edge off having a crappy dead-end job. If they started piss testing, I would leave before they could put a sample jar in my hand.
No surprises there....
romanP @ Wed Jan 09, 2008 11:58 pm
mtbr mtbr:
romanP romanP:
Drug testing people who could be a very large danger to the people around them if they're intoxicated on the job is not such a bad idea. Drug testing people who work in an office, or who just have to stand for six hours, should be totally exempt.
There are quite a lot of people who are employed and use drugs, and are not likely to become unemployed anytime soon. I smoke a joint most days after work, just to cut the edge off having a crappy dead-end job. If they started piss testing, I would leave before they could put a sample jar in my hand.
No surprises there....
$1:
There are quite a lot of people who are employed and use drugs, and are not likely to become unemployed anytime soon. I smoke a joint most days after work, just to cut the edge off having a crappy dead-end job. If they started piss testing, I would leave before they could put a sample jar in my hand.
No surprises there....
Of course, by "leave", I mean find another job. A piss test is an invasion of my privacy.
mtbr @ Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:07 am
romanP romanP:
mtbr mtbr:
romanP romanP:
Drug testing people who could be a very large danger to the people around them if they're intoxicated on the job is not such a bad idea. Drug testing people who work in an office, or who just have to stand for six hours, should be totally exempt.
There are quite a lot of people who are employed and use drugs, and are not likely to become unemployed anytime soon. I smoke a joint most days after work, just to cut the edge off having a crappy dead-end job. If they started piss testing, I would leave before they could put a sample jar in my hand.
No surprises there....
$1:
There are quite a lot of people who are employed and use drugs, and are not likely to become unemployed anytime soon. I smoke a joint most days after work, just to cut the edge off having a crappy dead-end job. If they started piss testing, I would leave before they could put a sample jar in my hand.
No surprises there....
Of course, by "leave", I mean find another job. A piss test is an invasion of my privacy.
I wouldn't hire you..are you stoned right now?
It's always an invasion of privacy for the GUILTY!
romanP @ Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:18 am
Why is it any of your business what I do in my own time?
Wally_Sconce @ Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:26 am
The reason why we dont urine test welfare recipients is many - not most - not all - just many of them would fail the test.
Welfare is supposed to be the lowest common denominator for canadians, or close to it.
I don't want to see people abusing welfare( if thats possible), but I also don't want to see the government create a mountain of qualifiers that make it impossible for someone to collect welfare when they need it...or when the people have enough sense to come ask for it instead of becoming a homeless street person.
Yogi @ Thu Jan 10, 2008 12:53 am
romanP romanP:
Why is it any of your business what I do in my own time?
Only to the point that IF what you are doing on your own time affects the health, safety or life of one of your co-workers on the job then certainly it is your employers business.Why is this so hard for you to comprehend???
mtbr @ Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:19 am
Yogi Yogi:
romanP romanP:
Why is it any of your business what I do in my own time?
Only to the point that IF what you are doing on your own time affects the health, safety or life of one of your co-workers on the job then certainly it is your employers business.Why is this so hard for you to comprehend???
because his brain is fried.
PluggyRug @ Thu Jan 10, 2008 8:53 am
romanP romanP:
Why is it any of your business what I do in my own time?
None...but if it affects what you do in MY time then fill the cup or bugger off.
Benoit @ Thu Jan 10, 2008 10:59 am
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:
The reason why we dont urine test welfare recipients is many - not most - not all - just many of them would fail the test.
Welfare is supposed to be the lowest common denominator for canadians, or close to it.
I don't want to see people abusing welfare( if thats possible), but I also don't want to see the government create a mountain of qualifiers that make it impossible for someone to collect welfare when they need it...or when the people have enough sense to come ask for it instead of becoming a homeless street person.
Welfare is supposed to be the lowest common denominator for canadians, or close to it.
I don't want to see people abusing welfare( if thats possible), but I also don't want to see the government create a mountain of qualifiers that make it impossible for someone to collect welfare when they need it...or when the people have enough sense to come ask for it instead of becoming a homeless street person.
Think twice about how you propose to prevent welfare abuses, you could end up with a thriving black market of drugs with the organized crime trying to monopolize it.
Wally_Sconce @ Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:23 am
Benoit Benoit:
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:
The reason why we dont urine test welfare recipients is many - not most - not all - just many of them would fail the test.
Welfare is supposed to be the lowest common denominator for canadians, or close to it.
I don't want to see people abusing welfare( if thats possible), but I also don't want to see the government create a mountain of qualifiers that make it impossible for someone to collect welfare when they need it...or when the people have enough sense to come ask for it instead of becoming a homeless street person.
Welfare is supposed to be the lowest common denominator for canadians, or close to it.
I don't want to see people abusing welfare( if thats possible), but I also don't want to see the government create a mountain of qualifiers that make it impossible for someone to collect welfare when they need it...or when the people have enough sense to come ask for it instead of becoming a homeless street person.
Think twice about how you propose to prevent welfare abuses, you could end up with a thriving black market of drugs with the organized crime trying to monopolize it.
I find your claims are more drug induced.
Benoit @ Thu Jan 10, 2008 11:44 am
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:
Benoit Benoit:
Aging_Redneck Aging_Redneck:
The reason why we dont urine test welfare recipients is many - not most - not all - just many of them would fail the test.
Welfare is supposed to be the lowest common denominator for canadians, or close to it.
I don't want to see people abusing welfare( if thats possible), but I also don't want to see the government create a mountain of qualifiers that make it impossible for someone to collect welfare when they need it...or when the people have enough sense to come ask for it instead of becoming a homeless street person.
Welfare is supposed to be the lowest common denominator for canadians, or close to it.
I don't want to see people abusing welfare( if thats possible), but I also don't want to see the government create a mountain of qualifiers that make it impossible for someone to collect welfare when they need it...or when the people have enough sense to come ask for it instead of becoming a homeless street person.
Think twice about how you propose to prevent welfare abuses, you could end up with a thriving black market of drugs with the organized crime trying to monopolize it.
I find your claims are more drug induced.
You only have found that you can use the word «drug» to cover up your misunderstanding.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 15 Next