DEBATE TIME. Welfare

[Jd1102]

A privately owned company can set all the stipulations they want, provided they fall within the laws (discrimination and whatnot). They have every right to require you to follow all laws as a requirement to employment. They are restricted, similar to law enforcement officials, in how they can go about proving you are using drugs but they can say you have to be drug free to work for them none-the-less. They can't say anything about what you do with beer and liquor at home, being they are legal. However, drugs aren't legal so they can use that against you.

i understand that but i see that as a violation of my privacy. like i said if im not high or drunk at work it shouldn't be there business. i never have a problem bc i don't portray myself as one at my places of work i have always passed my pee tests but through my eyes its invasion of privacy

It would be a violation of your privacy if they could just test you at will. They can't. You get hurt at work and want workers comp? Better pass your drug test. They don't have the right to just test you, but if it ever comes up that you have drugs in your system, they can fire you.

im sayin it should be a blood test not pee bc pee test you can't tell when you took it blood tells if its in you system at the moment

[MrSkippyJ]

I'm not going to get into what tests should and shouldn't be used, that is a totally different topic. My point is, an employer has every legal right to employ people who do not use drugs and can fire them if it is found out they DO use drugs (illegally).

[Jd1102]

I'm not going to get into what tests should and shouldn't be used, that is a totally different topic. My point is, an employer has every legal right to employ people who do not use drugs and can fire them if it is found out they DO use drugs (illegally).

you know someone could be on shrooms or lsd and it not be in the pee. only way to catch them is a spinal tap just sayin

[MrSkippyJ]

I'm not going to get into what tests should and shouldn't be used, that is a totally different topic.

[dkindle613]

It isn't ideal but nobody goes to work at McDonald's hoping to live the high life.

off topic, that is not true, i have a cousin that him and his wife both are store managers at McDonalds, and each make 75,000+ a year

[MrSkippyJ]

Fair enough The point I was making was people who work for near minimum wage don't expect to live the high life, not that you can't make a good living working at McDonald's.

[MrSkippyJ]

This has gone WAY off topic...sorry! Back to Welfare!

[Hugh G. Rection]

i see that 4 pages later, i didnt really miss anything.

must.... not.... feed.... the.... liberals.... here.... who.... dont.... seem.... to.... know.... that.... they.... are.... liberals.....

[MrSkippyJ]

i see that 4 pages later, i didnt really miss anything.

must.... not.... feed.... the.... liberals.... here.... who.... dont.... seem.... to.... know.... that.... they.... are.... liberals.....

this is also a big part of the problem and I don't mean you either . Politicians have the county believing and fighting over 2 sides (maybe more than 2 now). It's to the point where extremism (politically) is the norm to the point people actually hate someone if they are a different side. We all go around hating each other while both sides of the government come up with new ways to take our money.

[**Hollywood**]

Welfare should expire after a certain amount of time , then your case should have to be reviewed to conitnue receiving , the system is good for the ppl that need it , they intact should get a little more , but for the 75% of the ppl that are on it that are able to work and don't , it's bad , if they wernt taxes would be lower , I'm I'n Canada remember also just my 2 cents