Ethics: Drugs in workplace

Employers are faced with many ethical decisions in the conduct of their businesses, while employees are faced with many ethical concerns in protecting their rights to privacy. Controversial issues such as drug-testing, smoking, AIDS and the use of lie detectors all create unfriendly atmosphere in the workplace. Obviously, there are many facets and arguments favoring and contradicting those practices mentioned.

But, there is no hard and fast rule to these issues. One can only share one’s viewpoints but cannot claim that such are true and right. As to the question “Is drug testing an unwarranted invasion of employee privacy? Technically, drug testing is not illegal.The law protects the rights of an individual to privacy but court decisions differ on the basis of how strong the reasonable suspicions are.

In my opinion, the rights of an individual ends where the rights of another begins. If drug testing is the final answer to the damaging effects of using drugs in the workplace, then it is right to do so. It would not be necessarily an unwarranted invasion of employee privacy so long as careful measures in the conduct of drug test are observed. DesJardins and Duska emphasized that the procedure should observe certain limitations.

The employer should “consider if, when and under what conditions using a means such as drug testing to obtain that knowledge is justified (as cited in Shaw & Barry, 2007, p. 360). ” The following guidelines may be considered careful measures in the conduct of drug testing:1) Employer should only test for drugs that have genuine potential to harm if used in the job. 2) Drug test result should not be the basis to discipline or fire someone.

3) Employees should have the right to refuse to take a drug test because the results of such tests are inconclusive. ) The management should first establish legitimate suspicions of drug abuse by an employee or work group before conducting drug tests. 5) The focus of testing should be improving on-the-job performance rather than reprimanding off-the-job conduct. 6) Employees should be informed of the drug-test procedure or methods, and results obtained from the test.

They should also be given the chance to rebut the test findings. 7) If in any case, an employee’s employment status is going to be affected by the result of the drug test, a confirmatory test should be conducted. )All tests should be conducted in such a way that the dignity and privacy of the employee are respected and honored. The issue of drug testing versus employee privacy holds a very tough judgement call that would be any employer’s nightmare. Employers have the right to operate their businesses for profit, and the responsibility to provide safe workplaces for their employees without the threat of harm due to drugs. Employees have the right to privacy.

Respecting both rights are important if the business is to succeed and the employees are to retain their jobs.I would say creating a drug-free workplace with well-respected and dignified employees is of utmost concern and should be pursued with equality and fairness. Smoking and unprotected sex that could lead to AIDS are other issues involving employee privacy. Smoking and unprotected sex are an individual’s own choice. An employer should stay out of it. Smoking does lead to a lot of health complications but only to the individual who is smoking.

In the interest of public health, companies can provide a smoking-area for smokers and restrict smoking inside the office where other non-smokers are working.It is general knowledge that passive smoking can negatively affect a non-smoker’s health. In the hiring process, companies implement various safety checks such as psychological tests, medical exams, reasoning-skills tests and other aptitude tests that are important to measure intelligence, possible job-performance and hiring. These practices are generally acceptable because they are used to measure an individual’s capacity to handle a given work. However, the use of polygraph tests to screen out potential harmful employees is questionable and raises the privacy issue once again.

Critics would argue that polygraph tests have at least 50% inaccuracy rate. Furthermore, the use of lie detectors would entail certain questions that are strictly personal and not job-related, including but not limited to: workers’ sexual practices, union sympathies, finances, and political and religious beliefs. This alone violates the privacy right. There is no way of telling whether a person is harmful or not. I think, in the right situations, everyone of us has the potential to cause harm.

Relying on polygraph tests to assess an individual’s capacity or incapacity to engage in problematic activities is unjust and immoral.