Mandatory Drug Test Following The Accident example essay topic

Essay B October 1, 2002 Drug and Alcohol Abuse This essay will focus on the topic of drug testing in the workplace. The condition in which I support drug testing in the workplace is if the workplace or profession directly affects the safety of the. If drug testing can reduce the number of deaths, accidents, and injuries caused by workers who have been using drugs, then the rights of the public outweigh the individual's personal privacy rights. On January 4, 1987, an Amtrak train and a Conrail train collided near Chase, Maryland.

In the accident, 16 people were killed and 170 more were injured. The total financial cost to the two railway systems was estimated at $100 million. Investigators found that the engineer of the Conrail train had smoked marijuana before beginning his run. He ran through three stop signals before the collision occurred. The engineers' use of marijuana was discovered when he was subjected to a mandatory drug test following the accident. (1) A year later, Congress passed the Drug-Free Workplace Act requiring contractors to provide drug-free workplaces in order to be considered for a contract from a federal agency.

This law applies only to companies and individuals who have received a federal contract worth twenty-five thousand dollars or more or who have received a grant in any amount. Then Congress passed the Federal Omnibus Transportation Employee Testing Act of 1991, requiring alcohol and controlled substance testing of all employees in safety-sensitive jobs in the aviation, motor carrier, railroad and mass transit industries. (2) These newly passed laws have the intentions to protect the public safety and any professional who pursues a career in these types of fields have a duty to behave in a responsible manner. If the engineer of the Conrail train had been required to undergo mandatory drug testing as a routine part of his safety check prior to his taking command of a train, this accident could have been prevented. Drug testing can identify individuals who put others in jeopardy and can prevent such "accidents". There are two fundamental rights to choose between when arguing for or against mandatory and random drug testing among certain safety-sensitive positions, such as transportation workers.

The first is the right to privacy and protection from unreasonable search and seizures by the government. This right is detailed in the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. (3) Mandatory drug testing involves collecting evidence against a person without proof that a crime has been committed. In fact, the purpose of the drug testing would be to prevent drug use, therefore, preventing the crime. Yet, the Fourth Amendment clearly states that government agents show that a crime has been committed before subjecting the person to collect evidence against them. This right is solely and individual's right and it does not take into consideration the circumstances in which an individual is responsible for the public safety through their judgment and competency.

The second is the right of the government to protect the health and safety of citizens when that can be shown to be more important that the right of individual privacy. The thought of an airplane pilot using cocaine just before takeoff is frightening to anyone. The pilot is not only responsible for his / her own life, but for the lives of the passengers as well as the lives of those who are on the ground. As humans on this planet, we should have the right to protect ourselves from potential irresponsible acts of others that would jeopardize our safety. And anyone that pursues a profession that is responsible for the safety of passengers should constantly have their competency scrutinized and that includes drug testing as a proactive and preventative measure, not as a reaction to a catastrophe. We, as a society, expect our right to privacy and also deserve our right to privacy.

But we also expect and deserve the right to safety. For those individuals who pursue to serve the public in safety sensitive professions in which their judgment includes life and death decisions with other lives at stake, they forfeit their right to privacy and must subject themselves to mandatory drug testing. If anything, the testing can eliminate those with impaired judgment. The general public has the right to secure their safety. There are so many variables in the equation of public safety that the dangers that we have the means to control, we must control in order to act as a responsible society.

Bibliography

1. Gates, D., Legacy of a Railroad Disaster, Newsweek, May 18, 1987, p.
8.2. Newton, David E., Drug Testing: An Issue for School, Sports, and Work, Enslow Publishers, 1999 3.
Newton, David E., Drug Testing: An Issue for School, Sports, and Work, Enslow Publishers, 1999 1.
Newton, David E., Drug Testing: An Issue for School, Sports, and Work, Enslow Publishers, 1999.