With the stated motivations behind the policy to me it would be the definition of consistent. You want to give kids a reason to say no? Well how about knowing all your successful teachers are drug free as well.

 

It is hard to argue against your point but I still feel like it is Golden Delicious Apples to Newtown Pippin Apples.

Performance based or reasonable suspicion. The problem with any drug testing is that it doesn't do anything (with the exception of alcohol) to confirm intoxication, only residuals.

 

As for the comments about "educating kids" and "no need for concern"....I think the school systems have enough systemic issues to last them a lifetime of repair work without attempting to introduce witch hunts on their employees.

 

As soon as the school systems figure out how to educate the entire population of students, giving equal treatment to all....then they can test all they want.

 

Teachers probably need something to steady their nerves anyway....

 

You are correct in that it won't take the drugs out of the teacher's system. However, if you have a teacher consistently showing up late, or barely awake during class, testing would confirm suspicion and go a long way in supporting removal.

If it's mandatory for students then absolutely yes.

 

I also see good and bad...personally I have no problem with it.

 

I don't see why one should mandate the other. There is a big difference between children and working adults.

 

Personally, I had to pass a drug test to get hired and can be tested at any time at my employer's discretion. I have no problem with it.

 

The only time I have ever seen co-workers tested is in a couple of cases where employees were acting odd (and both were subsequently fired), or in the case of a workplace injury. If you get hurt and work and test positive, forget about workman's comp.

You are correct in that it won't take the drugs out of the teacher's system. However, if you have a teacher consistently showing up late, or barely awake during class, testing would confirm suspicion and go a long way in supporting removal.

 

We agree

I don't see why one should mandate the other. There is a big difference between children and working adults.

 

Personally, I had to pass a drug test to get hired and can be tested at any time at my employer's discretion. I have no problem with it.

 

The only time I have ever seen co-workers tested is in a couple of cases where employees were acting odd (and both were subsequently fired), or in the case of a workplace injury. If you get hurt and work and test positive, forget about workman's comp.

 

What if you get hurt at work and you are known to be a social drinker? Or even worse, a moderate drinker?

 

Again, if we are talking residual what's the issue?

What if you get hurt at work and you are known to be a social drinker? Or even worse, a moderate drinker?

 

Again, if we are talking residual what's the issue?

 

As long as you don't test positive for alcohol at the time of the injury, you are fine. I agree, you can be hung over, legally sober, but have delayed reaction times.

 

If you test positive for illegal drugs (most frequently MJ), residual or not, they have a reason not to deny coverage. Does it always work? Not sure. I just know from employee health it is a tool they use to deny coverage.

As long as you don't test positive for alcohol at the time of the injury, you are fine. I agree, you can be hung over, legally sober, but have delayed reaction times.

 

If you test positive for illegal drugs (most frequently MJ), residual or not, they have a reason not to deny coverage. Does it always work? Not sure. I just know from employee health it is a tool they use to deny coverage.

 

Exactly! This is all about an insurance not paying when they should be paying.

Exactly! This is all about an insurance not paying when they should be paying.

 

Yes, that is what employers are trying to do. However, the most commonly used drug tests only test for presence of drugs, not quantity. In the case of MJ, you can test positive for up to a month. Most others flush out more quickly. True impairment is difficult to prove.

 

But...back to the thread. I don't think teachers should be singled out for drug testing, but I do not have any problems with drug testing in work in general.

Yes, that is what employers are trying to do. However, the most commonly used drug tests only test for presence of drugs, not quantity. In the case of MJ, you can test positive for up to a month. Most others flush out more quickly. True impairment is difficult to prove.

 

But...back to the thread. I don't think teachers should be singled out for drug testing, but I do not have any problems with drug testing in work in general.

 

I don't think mandatory drug testing should ever happen without legitimate suspicion. But if you are going to do it to the students. The teachers and adminstrators handing out the punishment should go through the same procedure.

I say no to drug testing without reasonable suspicion (late days, performance decline, etc...) They aren't handling machinery or material dangerous to the general public. I am amazed at how many Republicans hate Government intrusion in their daily lives, except where we have our highest expectation of privacy.

 

This.

I believe this whole area of mandatory testing is going down a slippery slope.

 

There are a lot of functioning alcoholics and drug users out there - teachers, students, workers, managers.

 

I think CovCath may find how slippery this slope is.

 

I am not a fan of drug testing. But not a fan of prevalent drugs either. Not sure what the answer is. Or if there is a single answer.

YES

Colossal waste of money so we can all pat ourselves on the back and say, "we're protecting the kids". It won't catch half of the drug users and will cost a fortune.

 

Besides, if they are doing a good job in the classroom why do we even care?

Colossal waste of money so we can all pat ourselves on the back and say, "we're protecting the kids". It won't catch half of the drug users and will cost a fortune.

 

Besides, if they are doing a good job in the classroom why do we even care?

 

This!

yup, and twice on sunday.

 

If done randomly, the numbers I'm guessing will be very surprising.