MUSEUM-L Archives

Museum discussion list

MUSEUM-L@HOME.EASE.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Greg Trimper <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Museum discussion list <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 21 Dec 1994 16:34:00 CST
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines)
(this has been a most active list with this topic...)
 
EVERYBODY seems to have been saying their two cents about Mandatory Drug
Testing, so I'll add mine.
 
I agree with the majority of the list, in that I feel that such testing is
an invasion of privacy, and it sets up an initial environment of mistrust -
the employer is stating that "everyone is bad until proven good," and that
is too negative of an environment, for me, in which to work.  (By the way,
consultants are not subject to such tests in my experience...)
 
I can see where such testing is probably crucial to public safety - in
professions like the military, or pilots, or air traffic controllers, or
the police (and the DEA?), etc, where, by choosing that career and
accepting that job, you have accepted the conditions where a large portion,
if not all, of your personal time is given up for the job.  For example,
the military basically owns your person when you are on active duty, and
anything you do to "damage" yourself is destroying the "property of the
US Military." (Yes, I'm being simplistic).  Same with police - they are
"on duty" at all times.  Etc.
 
But I can not see that working in a museum, even a full-time recreation like
Colonial Williamsburg, requires that people's personal lives be under
such continual scrutiny.  *I would think (hope?) that if there is a drug
problem with employees that affects their job performance, then there are
already in place proper management tools to deal with that problem*.  If
there aren't, well, then, maybe I should go into Management Consulting,
because that is a basic shortcoming that anyone with common sense to address.
 
Finally, my random thoughts are that if they do implement testing, then it
should be for new employees as a condition of hire.  Current employees
came in under an effective contract that did not require such testing.
Also, I really doubt that the original inhabitants of CW were "drug free,"
seeing as how the anti-drug movement is less than 20 years old.  So, if
employees are somehow ingesting anything they may find growing in the area,
aren't they simply adding to the realism?  On that non-serious note...
 
Greg Trimper

ATOM RSS1 RSS2