Brett/David,
        I was really surprised that an institution like CW was
going to require drug testing.  Surprised, and a bit alarmed.
I think this is a very dangerous trend in a "free" society and
one that I would oppose as vigorously as I could.  It could,
under certain conditions, be legitimized (flight safety?), but
otherwise begins to sound Orwellian. I am not a lawyer but it
seems like there are real issues inherent in this that run to
the due process clauses of the 1st and 14th Amendments.
        Museum drug testing?  Requiring a speciman from the
curator of specipersons! I would be curious as to what
rationale is being offered for this?  Reckless operation of an
audio cassette tour?  Holding invertebrate fossils hostage?
Misuse of calcium-removing acids?  Violation of an ATF permit
for a still?  Sniffing the residual resin in the pine seat of a
windsor chair? Over-dusting of the snuff box display?  Surely
you jest!
        But humor may be inappropriate.  This does appear to be
part of a larger trend in the workplace that isn't at all funny.
I think we could/should look to AAM/VAM for leadership here;
that, and/or is there any kind of
association/union/representative group for museum employees?
Clearly these institutions are serious about this and, without
organized opposition, the individual employee will continue to
be clobbered.
        These are my thoughts--comments, anyone?
John B. Bunch
Associate Professor
University of Virginia
[log in to unmask]