Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

senate Bill S. 806

Allowing Trucking Companies to Use Hair Testing for Drug Screens

Argument in favor

Hair testing is more effective than urinalysis because of its longer detection period, and allowing trucking companies to widely adopt it as a testing method would make the roads safer.

BrianDeanMSF's Opinion
···
09/10/2015
There is no reason to keep drug checks from being more thorough, especially when dealing with truck drivers. I disagree that this type of testing is "invasive".
Like (6)
Follow
Share
DCPolitical's Opinion
···
06/18/2015
It stays in your hair longer, if they are drug testing, this is far more accurate and will expand the time slot greatly.
Like (3)
Follow
Share
Matt's Opinion
···
09/03/2015
I'm all for individual liberty, but the DOT should hair test.
Like (2)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

While it may be more effective, hair testing is also more intrusive than urinalysis and doesn’t take into account recent lifestyle changes that the subject of the test has made. And no test is foolproof, so there will still be errors.

Ben's Opinion
···
09/04/2015
This bill is well-intentioned, but unfocused. Truck drivers do not use drugs at a higher rate than any other profession. If we are worried about drivers putting other people in danger, focus on regulating driver fatigue, which causes more accidents.
Like (59)
Follow
Share
Greg's Opinion
···
09/03/2015
4th amendment violations and the failed drug war must end.
Like (22)
Follow
Share
Nikki's Opinion
···
09/03/2015
Employers and the government are too intrusive. What an individual does on their own time is their business. As long as it doesn't affect safety, it is not the employers business
Like (14)
Follow
Share

bill Progress


  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The house has not voted
  • The senate has not voted
      senate Committees
      Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
    IntroducedMarch 19th, 2015
    There is no reason to keep drug checks from being more thorough, especially when dealing with truck drivers. I disagree that this type of testing is "invasive".
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    This bill is well-intentioned, but unfocused. Truck drivers do not use drugs at a higher rate than any other profession. If we are worried about drivers putting other people in danger, focus on regulating driver fatigue, which causes more accidents.
    Like (59)
    Follow
    Share
    4th amendment violations and the failed drug war must end.
    Like (22)
    Follow
    Share
    Employers and the government are too intrusive. What an individual does on their own time is their business. As long as it doesn't affect safety, it is not the employers business
    Like (14)
    Follow
    Share
    This is a corporate invasion of privacy. What is in hair is for all means and purposes not in your system anymore and not going to affect your performance as a trucker.
    Like (12)
    Follow
    Share
    A urinalysis is plenty effective. You run the risk of, someone that has cleaned themselves up, not getting a job because a mistake of their recent past. In addition, people should not be penalized for things they do on their time. Their use of anything outside of work is none of anyone's concern if it does not directly effect their work. Someone who had a fight with their spouse is more of a danger, because they are distracted, than someone who smoked cannabis before bed.
    Like (10)
    Follow
    Share
    If a driver gets into an accident in June, he should not be held more accountable because of a positive test resulting from him smoking for a few days in April. The period is too long, and will lead to scapegoating.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Testing someone for drugs by taking their hair or bodily fluids is wrong and should only be done when the person is suspected of having a drug problem. This is one of the most ridiculous aspects of the drug war in my eyes, and I believe we should abolish drug testing unless it is absolutely necessary. It is crazy that many employers require a drug test before they hire someone. If the person was doing drugs to the point where it was affecting their life it should be visible to the employer if they have any common sense.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Unfair to people that live in states where certain drugs are legal. What they do in their time is their business and if it doesn't affect work performance why test for it?
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Where does it stop
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Truck drivers have it tough enough.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    It stays in your hair longer, if they are drug testing, this is far more accurate and will expand the time slot greatly.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Who cares what type of test they use? If the test is accurate it shouldn't matter if it is hair, blood, urine, salvia, or whatever else
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    I'm all for individual liberty, but the DOT should hair test.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    I could go either way on this topic but I believe in protecting our rights and less regulations.
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    It's none of the companies business what in my hair or pee! Free country indeed! Get out of our private lives!
    Like (2)
    Follow
    Share
    Drug testing is an invasion of privacy. If they don't want truckers to be high while driving, a hair test is overkill.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    It makes sense to use the most accurate form of testing. Do police officers and government officials take the same test?
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    What a person does in their own time is none of anybody's business. Particularly if one uses marijuana medicinally, is should not be a factor in weather or not you get or maintain a job you are qualified and trained to do.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    While I believe marijuana should be legalized, i think any company should be able to screen any of their employees, so long as such screenings are agreed on in contract with the employee. If the employee doesn't want to be screened, they should work somewhere that doesn't screen their employees.
    Like (1)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE