Here's one example of the spirit of Samuel Parnell on Labour Day: rural industries which insist on pre-employment drug-testing are having trouble finding employees:
A South Taranaki processing plant has noted a downturn in applicants. The company, which did not want to be identified, said that before a drug test was required the phone "rang off the hook" with job seekers.That had changed to "about a dozen" calls after drug testing was introduced this year.
While there are definite safety issues with being stoned on the killing floor, drug testing is also an intrusion into people's private lives, and one which they clearly loathe enough to vote with their feet against. And given that that unnamed meatworks cannot force people to work for them, they will either have to change their policy, or accept that they will not be able to find workers in the future.
I think most employers don't really understand the psychology of a job seeker.
ReplyDeleteeven when jobs are uncommon (and they are quite common now) many potential empolyees will reject the concept of having to write a letter or put a stamp on an envelope let alone having drug tests or aptitude tests or anything else that raises any potential for awkwardness (even if they are not drug users for example).
The sly employer will suprise you with the complications after you have already gone to the effort to turn up - because a much smaller percentage will walk away at the door.
"And given that that unnamed meatworks cannot force people to work for them, they will either have to change their policy, or accept that they will not be able to find workers in the future."
ReplyDeleteThe same argument applies to working hours, minimum wages, compulsory unionism etc etc et al.
stoniness
In an article in the Dom post this morning, they're quoting that workers tested positive to drug *use* in 20% of industrial accidents. Given cannabis can be detected for up to 3 months after use, it's pretty clear a small minority of accidents could be attributed to drug use. A rational campaign would be focussing on the other 80%.
ReplyDeleteThe article goes on to say drug use is generally symptomatic of other 'problems' as if the only morally acceptable lifestyle was a drug-free (presumably best = hard-working Calvanist) one.
Unless a social-liberties lobby group (can't the Libertarians trnsform themselves into something useful here?) arises sometime soon, and with some teeth, I expect the nanny-ist smokefree, compulsory-cycle-helmet lobby groups to keep extending their campaign for a risk free, overly-legislated world where we can all take tea and cake on Sundays and all live homogenously to a ripe old age..
Drug testing in the work place is bluring the lines between your life & work, I myself work to live not live to work. The fact that employers want to take my body fluids for a job interview is just plain weird.
ReplyDeleteWhy cant the labs develop tests that show whether you have consumed cannabis within the last 4 -6 hours.
This would be far better in showing up workers who are a safety risk.
The occupation of slaughterhouse worker is not only the most dangerous occupation to humans (check the ACC levies), but slaughterhouses cause hideous cruelty to animals. US undercover investigations have revealed numberous instances of transported animals being fried/frozen to death (dependong on the weather), downed animals being left to die, animals being scalded alive because the sticker missed his thrust, and deliberate torture and mutilation by the desensitised workers. There is no reason to suppose that things will be any different in NZ.
ReplyDeleteSo I am pleased management are insisting on drug testing, because this means they will not be able to get any workers, and they will go out of business. If people have to eat meat they should at least kill their own, so they have absolutely no doubts how it is produced.