New Hair drug tests for workers.

[pearlpro]

Hair tests help trucking firm keep drug users off road - JSOnline

Your Guilty until you prove your Innocent, when does this end, I DO NOT condone drug use at all, BUT when do we stop this DNA collection process because thats what this is....who keeps the sample, what else is done with it, are there any other tests done on your DNA sample...can a testing facility then go on and look at your Genes and determine pre dispositions for other issues....this is a concern.

And again If I cant get a job driving a truck, or flying a plane or a Train then why do people get free money from the state to live or sell or trade and they dont give any kind of drug tests..

Many younger drivers may find themselves trapped by this process because the Drugs stay in the hair follicles longer, suddenly will we see a rash of BALD DRIVERS...

 

[EasyDoesIt]

I'm already bald. They shaved some hair from my underarm.

 

[BigCat]

I don't think it is unfair to anyone. Shaving your head does no good either. They will just take hair from other places.

 

[highway star]

And again If I cant get a job driving a truck, or flying a plane or a Train

If you're going to try to fly a train...

 

[Ragman]

If you're going to try to fly a train...

 

[Moot]

"Flying that train, high on cocaine,
Casey Jones you better watch your speed.
Trouble ahead, trouble behind,
And you know that notion just crossed my mind."

 

[xiggi]

"Flying that train, high on cocaine,
Casey Jones is ready, watch your speed.
Trouble ahead, trouble behind,
And you know that notion just crossed my mind."

That's exactly what came to my mind when i read highways post.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using EO Forums

 

[beachbum]

They have been using the hair drug test in other industries for years, it just took trucking longer to get to this type of drug test.

Yep it stays longer and just think of drivers that are in the industry that do drugs and are called in for a random, there won't be any masking of drug use before the test.

 

[EasyDoesIt]

I had the hair shaved from my underarm 4/08 as part of my pre qualifying tests to drive for a major carrier. It was a first for me but it was company new hire policy along with other tests I had never done to become a company driver.

 

[cheri1122]

Hmmmm - the big trucking companies say that urine tests are too easy to cheat, but the statistics say that trucking accidents have been steadily decreasing, so how can stricter drug tests be justified? Because if people are cheating the tests in significant numbers, it isn't causing more accidents...just sayin.

 

[xiggi]

My guess is its all about liability.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using EO Forums

 

[chefdennis]

And this is an issue why??? I mean no one owes anyone a job...if you dont like what is required to work for a "privatily owned company, then dont "Apply" for a job with them...

Geeez....

 

[Turtle]

Just because it's a privately owned company does not give them the right to do whatever that want, or create unreasonable conditions for employment. The reason some are collecting hair is because no one has sued them for collecting DNA samples without a valid reason. They can't collect blood samples for that very reason.

 

[EasyDoesIt]

The hair sample was a condition of employment just like running NYC or Canada might be a condition. Some companies ask for your Facebook password as pre employment screening. I have nothing to hide but would decline giving my password.

 

[ATeam]

Truckinginfo.com published a good article on this topic in November, 2011. It explains why major carriers are going to hair testing when not required by law to do so. It explains why all carriers are not doing so. And it touches on some of the legal issues, but not on the DNA and privacy issues raised by pearlpro in the original post.

I was surprised to learn from the article that at J.B. Hunt, the urine test positive rate was one to 1.5 percent. When hair testing began, the rate soared to 15 percent positives, meaning that a significant percentage of the fleet drivers had either figured out how to beat the urine tests and/or the urine tests -- being less robust -- picked up fewer drug-use histories. The 15 percent rate declined to 4 percent over time, probably because word got out about hair testing and the drug users went elsewhere to find employment.

Before I read pearlpro's concerns about DNA testing, I was all for hair testing. One of the reasons was the ease with which the test can be administered. You don't have to time things right to give a sample. I also liked the fact that hair testing covers a longer time period and the test is more difficult if not impossible to beat.

However, pearlpro's concerns are valid. Technology is advancing so fast these days that privacy advocates barely have the time to formulate a position on one issue before ten others surface. Everything we do and much of what we think can be tracked these days. The regulatory urge to get everything possible about everyone into databases is often acted upon without any thought about larger issues and unintended consequences.

While hair testing is a good method to screen out truck drivers or would-be truck drivers who use drugs, at the very least, laws should be in place to ensure that samples are destroyed after they are used for their intended purpose and that the only purpose they are used for is drug screening.

 

[Moot]

...and/or the urine testes -- being less robust -- picked up fewer drug-use histories.

The exclusion of a simple consonant kinda changes the intended meaning of this sentence. It has me wondering who will determine robustness? It has also triggered a mental recall of a Woody Allen movie. It isn't fair that women and eunuchs are being excluded. I think I'll drown my sorrows with a bottle of Woolite.

 

[ATeam]

The exclusion of a simple consonant kinda changes the intended meaning of this sentence.

Spelling corrected. Doh!

 

[Turtle]

Advocates of hair testing, especially the ones who use it, never speak of DNA collection. They avoid that topic like the plague. They try a little too hard to avoid the issue, or will simply dismiss any DNA concerns out of hand. That should give one pause. CR England uses their own lab. That should give one pause.

But the one that should really perk a few ears up is one line in particular from the article linked by Phil: "As a result [of urine testing versus hair testing], companies don't get an accurate idea of what a driver does in his or her free time."

Wow

 

[purgoose10]

I don't think it has much to do with quality urine. Company's usually pay for 4 hrs for a company driver to go have a test. It will save them a bundle testing hair and not the other. They call in a testing facility and have everyone tested at once in the office. One hour everyones done.

 

[BobWolf]

My woman works in a medical lab and I asked one of the lab techs who actualy do the testing about urine and DNA. I was told DNA can also be found in clean urine, if there is no blood it is in diluted amounts. Because DNA is made from protiens and clear urine contains trace ammounts of blood and protiens however it would take a large amount of urine like one quart of urine to find enough D.N.A. Now, if the donor has an infection, medical condition, or other reason especialy men that causes an increase of blood or other protien in the urine it wont take much at all to collect enough DNA on somone I will ask about the hair samples as this is a good question.

Bob Wolf.