Drug Testing is Not a Violation of Individual Rights

analytical Essay
2678 words
2678 words

Every day companies lose millions of dollars due to employee drug use. Athletes break world records with gargantuan strength, but not on a fair scale. Drugs ruin the lives of users and cause injury to those who must work with users. Detection by officials is necessary to curb this problem. When does the safety for others violate the rights of drug users? Drug testing, whether in the workplace or on the athletic field, is not a violation of civil rights.

"In 1988, the National Institute on Drug Abuse estimated that 12 percent of full-time employed Americans between the ages of 20 and 40 used an illicit drug" (Goldburg 62). Twenty percent of the 14.5 million Americans who use drugs are employed. This fact has convinced many that drug testing at the workplace should be mandatory (Goldburg 51). Sixty percent of the major corporations in America require drug testing as a condition of employment (Goldburg 50). Steven Mitchell Sack asserts that "Experts estimate that more than 50 percent of the major corporations in the United States now engage in drug and alcohol screening before hiring new employees; such tests are on the rise, particularly in high technology and security-conscious industries" (41). Because of such frequent testing, the number of applicants who test positive is down to under five percent (Sack 41).

Not only do the companies pay the price for drug users, but so does the public. The public pays higher prices due to lost productivity from work-related accidents and job absenteeism caused by drug abuse (Goldburg 51). The average drug user is three times as late as fellow employees and has 2.5 times as many absences (Sack 141). A drug user is five times more likely to file a worker's compensation ...

... middle of paper ...

...earche. July 1991:52.

Goldburg, Raymond, ed. Taking Sides. Guilford, Connecticut: Dushkin, 1993.

Huxford, Andrea. "What You Need to Know About Drug Testing in the Work Place." Netscape.

Levy, Leonard W., ed. Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. New York: Macmillan, 1992.

O'Brien, David. "Rx for Disaster." Sun-Sentinel. 14 July 1991: 52-54.

"Policy of Clarkson Construction Company." Pamphlet. No other information given.

Preferred Alliance. "The Road to D.O.T Compliance" Netscape.

Sack, Steven Mitchell. From Hiring to Firing. New York: Legal Strategies, 1995.

Wornsnop, Richard L. "Athletes and Drugs." CQ Reasearcher. 26 July 1991: 513-519.

Zigarelli, Michael A. Can They Do That? A Guide to Your Rights on the Job. New York: Lexington, 1994

In this essay, the author

  • Opines that random testing is the right way to combat drug abuse by athletes.
  • Explains huxford, andrea, "what you need to know about drug testing in the workplace."
  • Describes zigarelli, michael a. can they do that? a guide to your rights on the job.
  • Argues that drug testing is not a violation of civil rights. the average drug user is three times more likely to have an accident, one-third as productive, and has much higher rates of tardiness and absenteeism.
  • Explains that many drug tests are legal, especially in the workplace, because applicants have less legal rights to protest such tests.
Get Access