Get help with any kind of assignment - from a high school essay to a PhD dissertation
Every day companies lose millions of dollars because of employee drug use. Athletes break world records with enormous strength, but maybe not on a reasonable scale. Drugs ruin the lives of consumers and lead to injury to people who have to work together with customers. Detection by officials is necessary to curb this problem. When can the security for many others violate the rights of drug users? Drug testing, if in the workplace or on the athletic area, isn't a breach of civil rights. "In 1988, the National Institute on Drug Abuse estimated that 12 percent of full-time employed Americans between the ages of 20 and 40 used an illegal drug" (Goldburg 62). Twenty per cent of the 14.5 million Americans who use drugs are employed. This fact has convinced many that drug testing in the workplace should be compulsory (Goldburg 51). Sixty percent of the significant corporations in America require drug testing as a condition of employment (Goldburg 50). Steven Mitchell Sack asserts that "Experts estimate that over 50 percent of the significant corporations in the United States now take part in drug and alcohol screening prior to hiring new employees; these tests are on the upswing, particularly in high technology and security-conscious industries" (41). Due to such regular testing, the amount of applicants who test positive is down to under 5 percent (Sack 41). Not only do the companies pay the cost for drug users, but so does the people. The people pays higher costs due to lost productivity from work-related accidents and job absenteeism brought on by drug misuse (Goldburg 51). The typical drug user is twice as late as fellow employees and has 2.5 times as many absences (Sack 141). A drug user is five times more likely to file a worker's compensation.