![]() |
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 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Happy Dog" wrote in message
The issue I was raising is efficacy and cost effectiveness. And, the pro-testing camp don't have solid evidence that random drug testing of aviation professionals is either. The debate quickly degrades into name-calling and accusations that people who oppose it are crazy or drug users themselves. But, stick to the efficacy and cost-effectiveness issues and it doesn't look justified. It's promoted by hype and hysteria. How would the pro-testing camp measure the lost productivity caused by a chronic marijuana smoker? Even if the chronic user isn't under the influence, studies have shown that his/her performance is not 100%. Chronic users exhibit less ambition (more sick days), more anxiety (less likely to get along with customers and co-workers), and short term memory impairment (forget the landing gear). These traits are measured in scientific laboratories. A pilot exhibiting symptoms similar to those of a chronic user can cost me more in one day than my drug abatement program costs for a whole year. It's hard enough to contain costs for stupid pilot tricks without adding dopers to the roster. Are you including these costs in your cost-effectiveness study? Add this cost to your study. If an accident happened, what would the plaintif's lawyers have to say about employing a doper? "Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, consider the negligence of this operator who put a stoner in command of a airplane transporting the public. He unneccessarily endangered my clients." At that point, it doesn't matter if the pilot wasn't stoned. The image that a failed test will imprint on a jury will still be there. Is this cost in your cost-effectiveness study? Here's a cost you may have forgotten in your study. Eighty-five percent of my clientele are repeat customers. They (most anyway) are of high social standing. My business would suffer immeasureably if word of mouth spread that I was using stoners for pilots. How does your study quantify this cost? Life is unfair. All things aviation are a compromise. You want to get paid to fly, or you want to join former Miami Dolphin Ricki Williams? D. |
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 |