Moscow Minidoka: No one should be forced to take drug tests for work unless they are involved in keeping other people from harm (bus drivers, airplane pilots, etc). I don't care about "rule of law," since when has it been the HR department's job to determine that employees aren't breaking the law on their off hours? If someone goes home and drinks a six-pack of beer, smokes a joint, or engages in other "high risk" behaviors like bonking loose women (or men), driving above the speed limit, or eating cheeseburgers, and I am that person's boss, should I care as long as their performance at work is top-notch? The answer is - no. At least, not unless we want to turn this country into a fascist wonderland where we all snitch on each other and the prevailing philosophy is "you have nothing to fear if you're not breaking the law."

DFO: Well said, MM. I'm bothered on so many levels by the urine solidarity performed yesterday by community leaders. Yeah, they believed they were doing the right thing. But it amounts to an endorsement of what I consider illegal search and seizure. I also can't help thinking that unscrupulous employers could use the urine test to determine other things about workers or prospective workers. Could a job applicant who's pregnant but not showing be eliminated from consideration as the result of a urine test, for example. We're headed down a slippery slope, HBOers.

---

---