drug/alcohol testing policy: effective?

"Morgans" wrote in message "Happy Dog"
wrote

They administered breathalyzers? Drug testing is different from alcohol
testing. There's a big difference between being impaired on the job and
a
few days before, no?


I can't speak to the part 135 operators, but I have a commercial driver's
license, and yes, they come to your place of employment and do a
breathalyzer, on the spot.

And, like I said, that's a very different kind of test. I have no issues
with it. Operating a commercial vehicle while under the influence of
alcohol is very different from operating a commercial vehicle a couple days
after you smoked a joint.

moo

Then there are the pre-employment tests. The prospective employee
knows that
pre-employment testing is required. The prospective employee knows
that s/he
can decline or postpone the testing. Yet still, there are a few who
fail
pre-employment testing.

Are there? These people would have to be total idiots. Now, what is
more likely:
We have these total idiots applying for jobs, often with some pretty
impressive looking credentials, OR
The tests aren't quite as accurate as you think they are, and have a
fairly high false positive rate?

The question can be answered thus - what kind of GUARANTEE does the
drug testing operation give you? In other words, how much will they
pay in DAMAGES if they are wrong? If the answer is "a whole lot less
than a ruined career and reputation is worth" well, then, you have your
answer.

Michael

"Corky Scott" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 07:34:21 -0800, "C J Campbell"
wrote:

I
spend an inordinate amount of time counseling kids who have become
pregnant
after "moderate" alcohol consumption.

Hmmm, and here I always thought it required having sex to become
pregnant.

Bad joking aside, if said kids loose their ability to think straight
or say no after moderate alcohol consumption then almost by
definition, it wasn't really moderate consumption.

Also I'm curious, how does being an alcoholic get you on a respirator?

It was my mother, if you must know. She was found unconscious on the floor
having drunk a whole bottle of vodka. Her blood alcohol level was so high
that it took four days for it to get down to where she was merely legally
drunk. Anyway, she vomited, aspirated some of the vomit and nearly drowned.
She had to be on a respirator for three weeks.

She believed she was a moderate drinker and still believes that. Thankfully,
she has not had a drink in nearly two years now.

"gatt" wrote in message
...

"C J Campbell" wrote in message

I suspect that if you are getting ill before you get drunk that you are
already an alcoholic.

Wow. So if two or three shots of whiskey or three beers over four hours
will cause me to puke until 9 or 10 a.m. the next day, that makes me an
alcoholic?


That does not fit any description of moderate drinking. It is far in excess
of what you would have to take to derive any medical benefits from alcohol
consumption.

If I drink a pint of Guiness I'll puke. Does that make me an alcoholic?

Possibly. You certainly show signs of an allergy to alcohol, common to
alcoholics.

"Morgans" wrote in message
...

"C J Campbell" wrote


I suspect that if you are getting ill before you get drunk that you are
already an alcoholic.

Boy, now *that's* a jump.

How do you figure/what is your reasoning for say that?

See my reply to Gatt.

"cylon" wrote in message
...

Testing isn't the only part of the program. Many forget, or don't know,
that
education about recognizing impaired individuals is part of the program.
Recognizing colleagues who need help with a dependency problem is part of
the training. Steering these people with problems to professional help and
rehabilitation is part of the program. Those operators who complain about
the cost probably don't care much about their employees.

What are peoples' thoughts and experiences?

I am a Part 135 operator. I am a Part 121 pilot. Drug and alcohol
abatement
programs are here to stay. I welcome them.

The testing is worthless. Otherwise I think the biggest factor in weeding
out problem pilots has been a cultural change.

The truth is that if someone really tests positive on the tests, then his
co-workers probably already knew about his problem. I think most testing
centers would be hard pressed to come up with an example of actually finding
genuine abusers that no one knew about already.

Bob,
It may be a feel good program but I know that it keeps some of my
co-workers from drinking during the week. We have an random drug and
alcohol testing (required by DOT).
I know of one one person fired for using drugs and one for alcohol in
the past two years.
Michelle

Bob Gardner wrote:

It's a feel-good program for the government, allowing them to show the
public that they are "doing something." It has no practical effect.

Bob Gardner

"gatt" wrote in message
...


Casual debate he

Something like .1% of the pilots randomly tested for alcohol and drugs
(one
was .5%, I believe) tested positive in 2004. That's one in a thousand.
As
a result of this percentage, the random test rate will stay at 25% for
drugs
and something similar for alcohol.

Meanwhile, commercial pilots and operators say that the cost of a
Part-135-type drug and alcohol testing program is nearly cost prohibitive,
so it can be argued that this sort of testing program hurts General
Aviation.

The discussion is, is the aviation community's drug and alcohol habit--or
lack thereof--influenced by drug testing policy; do pilots obstain because
of drug tests, or do they obstain because they're pilots? Would it be
better for the aviation community to test after accidents only, and do
away
with the current random test practice and the associated expenses? 'Cause
if you have an accident, they're going to test you anyway, correct?

What are peoples' thoughts and experiences?

-c

"C J Campbell"
"gatt" wrote in message

If I drink a pint of Guiness I'll puke. Does that make me an alcoholic?

Possibly. You certainly show signs of an allergy to alcohol, common to
alcoholics.

Right, that's enough. What is your, concise as possible, definition of
"alcoholic"?

Le Moo

"They're *all* vampires!"

- can't remember

"Michelle P" wrote in message
nk.net...
Bob,
It may be a feel good program but I know that it keeps some of my
co-workers from drinking during the week. We have an random drug and
alcohol testing (required by DOT).
I know of one one person fired for using drugs and one for alcohol in
the past two years.
Michelle

It would be interesting to know whether they were actually using drugs or
alcohol. Was their substance abuse discovered by random testing, or was it
something that everybody knew about anyway?

"Michelle P"
....
Bob,
It may be a feel good program but I know that it keeps some of my
co-workers from drinking during the week.

Of course it does. But at what cost? And what is the safety benefit? You
sure that the resources couldn't be better spent elsewhere?

moo