Pre-employment drug testing: Reducing turnover or violating rights? essay sample

Hiring new employees, companies bear responsibility for their choice as it directly influences corporate spending and well-being of employees. Pre-employment drug testing has already become a popular means of screening applicants. Taking into account a rising number of Americans suffering from drug abuse, employers need to protect themselves from taking unreasonable risks. Opponents of such drug testing claim that the practice is a pure disrespect and discrimination in the workplace.

Businesses that insist on pre-employment drug testing invest more time and money in the interviews paying the laboratories and waiting for the results to arrive. Perhaps, employers have good reasons to treat applicants this way. Hiring drug-free employees, companies protect themselves from additional expenses. Corporate healthcare policy covers a lot of medical services so that having a staff with drug abuse companies practically go into unlimited spending. Besides, this is the way to create a sound corporate environment. Despite the controversy, pre-employment drug testing boosts the corporate reputation.

Critics of the pre-employment procedure do not believe in positive intentions of tough employers. A sample collection procedure can be humiliating to the applicants. They are not eligible for privacy during the procedure which is outrageous. In case of fraud, an inaccurate test result damages employee’s reputation. It is possible that medication distorts the results which may discredit an innocent person.

All in all, pre-employment drug testing is a serious issue the effects of which shall be measured by each particular employer. If the benefits for a particular company outnumber the drawbacks, drug tests shall take place in all interviews.