Unpopular Opinion

I'm in NZ, but generally if you work on an industrial site, pre-work checks are normal along with "reasonable cause testing" and random checks are becoming more popular.

For office work, I don't know anyone that is tested.

Having worked on various industrial sites for over 15 years, I have only been randomly tested once, I have had two pre-employment checks done.

I don't see it as a big deal here, the reasonable cause testing is done to ensure who is safe, we have nationalized insurance here so there is no denial of claims or anything similar. You will almost certainly be fired if you are under the influence and cause an accident.

Depends on the job. I don't know that I want my kids teacher on meth, or an airline pilot on speed or whatever. Working in education and the aviation industry (and military) are the only times I've been required to take a drug test. Don't know why it would be mandatory for certain industries. Like. Is my food not going to make it to the table from the kitchen because the waiter smoked a joint before his shift?

IIRC, many industries still get tax breaks and financial incentives for doing so.

I work in a manufacturing facility, so very much a safety sensitive environment.

We are required to be drug tested as part of a pre-employment screening and potentially after incidents. The cool thing is it is part of our collective bargaining agreement that they are not allowed to screen for THC with a urine sample because of how invasive it is.

Mouth swabs are more expensive, but also only screen for THC within 24 hours. I'm sure that number is up for debate as well, but it is a far cry from the 6-8 weeks you can potentially test positive for with a urine screening.

Place I work explicitly told me they don't drug test. They understood what you do on your time is your business. So long as you don't come to work under the influence of anything.

America is a sick joke

It’s only legal if it’s required for your profession (like in aviation), it might threaten life or mean death (for instance a taxi driver), there are big non-lethal risks connected to the employee’s work (no idea on this one)

As it’s a medial procedure so it has extra rules regarding that and the shielding of medical records from the employer.

The company also have to discuss this with the workers show stewards before they choose to do testing, and other forms of action needs to be taken and be ineffective before you can move on to testing.

It's largely a cash cow industry that exists to absolve employers of liability. It takes on a different form in cases of legitimate safety concerns.

It's not unlike the DEI industry in that way, because while there's legitimate notions behind it, the form it takes in this coercive context is more about what benefits the employer. If your employee's supposed personal resentments are the cause of all the problems with nepotism and favoritism etc... if employees are more focused on their own differences and the employer can claim a moral high ground...