![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
gatt wrote:
Something like .1% of the pilots randomly tested for alcohol and drugs (one was .5%, I believe) tested positive in 2004. That's one in a thousand. As a result of this percentage, the random test rate will stay at 25% for drugs and something similar for alcohol. I seem to recall that the false positive rate for the lower-cost tests (those that don't cost hundreds of dollars per test) is also something like 0.1%. Perhaps that means the actual rate is zero, and the only effect of the policy is to increase costs and ruin careers while doing nothing to improve safety. That would be about par for the FAA. Meanwhile, commercial pilots and operators say that the cost of a Part-135-type drug and alcohol testing program is nearly cost prohibitive, so it can be argued that this sort of testing program hurts General Aviation. Which suggests to me that they're probably not using the expensive tests with low false-positive potential. The discussion is, is the aviation community's drug and alcohol habit--or lack thereof--influenced by drug testing policy; do pilots obstain because of drug tests, or do they obstain because they're pilots? Pilots don't abstain. I know lots of professional pilots, and as a whole they're the heaviest drinkers I know. They don't drink when they're flying, though. I also know quite a few who quit smoking dope after testing kicked in. None of them was ever high on the job, though. I weigh in solidly on the "Testing is a waste of time and money" side of the equation. What are peoples' thoughts and experiences? In my last job, we all ****ed in a bottle. We worked with radioactive materials in refineries and chemical plants, so it just made sense. Yeah, right. The only positive that ever came up was from my boss - who was rabidly anti-drug. He tested positive for opiates (heroin). He screamed bloody murder, and because he was a senior manager and not a peon, an investigation was done. There was a retest, which also showed positive for opiates, but at a lower concentration. However, when the sample was sent to a proper lab, it turned out to be a false positive - a related chemical which is a breakdown product of poppy seeds. That poppyseed bagel did him in. In spite of this, I found the remains of a marijuana cigarette (a roach) in the bathroom of our shop - only used by employees who were on the program. Somehow they were passing the random tests - meaning they had figured out a way to beat it. Truth is, I know exactly who was high on the job - it was obvious from the quality of the work. However, I couldn't have him fired for it - he was passing the tests. One fine day he missed not one but THREE flights as I waited for him at the airport and the customer got ****ed. We never got another contract at that facility again. He was fired for this. I don't have much respect for drug testing. I think it's a way for lazy managers to hand over the tough decisions to a technician. Michael |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Testing Stick Ribs | Bob Hoover | Home Built | 3 | October 3rd 04 02:30 AM |
Bush's Attempt to Usurp the Constitution | WalterM140 | Military Aviation | 20 | July 2nd 04 04:09 PM |
Showstoppers (long, but interesting questions raised) | Anonymous Spamless | Military Aviation | 0 | April 21st 04 05:09 AM |
No US soldier should have 2 die for Israel 4 oil | Ewe n0 who | Military Aviation | 1 | April 9th 04 11:25 PM |
No US soldier should have 2 die for Israel 4 oil | Ewe n0 who | Naval Aviation | 0 | April 7th 04 07:31 PM |