Truck driver shortage - true or false?

[R650R]

I'm not sure what those two are on in pic Mashman but its somehow impaired my train of thought as well...

Yes no one should be drugged or under alcohol influence in workplace but to seriously combat it the testing needs to be 100% independent and random dates.
That means no chance for management to give the guys they want to keep a heads up and also management level should be tested too.
The problem is in NZ usage is so widespread that no one can afford to tackle the problem properly without sinking their own business. One of my early jobs was in a factory, and I was quickly exposed to just how many dope smokers there are in our community. I came from a drug free family and background(and still am drug free 100%) and it was quite a shock how many were users.
That employer was one of the more successful local businesses and many of the workers were doing quite technical assembly work and iso9002 approved level. That company would have been toast if drug tested...

[SMOKEU]

If you get caught on the road with more than a safe limit of alcohol then you get taken off the road.

So, what is a "safe" limit of alcohol?

[Grubber]

I'm not sure what those two are on in pic Mashman but its somehow impaired my train of thought as well...

Yes no one should be drugged or under alcohol influence in workplace but to seriously combat it the testing needs to be 100% independent and random dates.
That means no chance for management to give the guys they want to keep a heads up and also management level should be tested too.
The problem is in NZ usage is so widespread that no one can afford to tackle the problem properly without sinking their own business. One of my early jobs was in a factory, and I was quickly exposed to just how many dope smokers there are in our community. I came from a drug free family and background(and still am drug free 100%) and it was quite a shock how many were users.
That employer was one of the more successful local businesses and many of the workers were doing quite technical assembly work and iso9002 approved level. That company would have been toast if drug tested...

I agree with your testing methods.
The testing agency we use comes in at random and not even management know until they arrive.
Yes I have tested right along with anyone else standing close by. It works.
As far as being widespread, if, as employers, we made a stand it would be gone.
We have as far as I can tell right now, nil usage.
One of our office ladies tested positive and got desk duties only and was warnes she would be tested again at random. When re tested a month later she failed again. She was dismissed. She had every opportunity to be clean but didnt. She used to have access to company vehicles during the day.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

[Bikemad]

before you answer dickhead smokeys question Grubber............ask him to outline the parameters for "responsible meth use"........his words

[Grubber]

And you have supporting evidence that this is both the case, and the level at which the tests are performed to?

Tell you what, you stay off booze as long as I stay off dope, then we'll see how hard it can be eh!

As for the levels...I take the word of the experts who do the testing on that.
As for the suporting evidence you speak of...thought all this was fairly common knowledge to be fair. Evidential breath test for alcohol is fairly well known followed by blood test for the more accurate results.
I dont need to drink at all, in fact havent had a drink for probably 2 months or more so it wouldnt worry me at all to have none.. How bout you? ?
Your argument seems to be about how unfair it is for a dope user to not get a job due to his choice of drug.
When in actual fact, that choice is yours and yours alone. Your responsibility full stop.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

[Grubber]

Wrong reply bugger. Bloody tapatalk.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

[bogan]

As for the levels...I take the word of the experts who do the testing on that.
As for the suporting evidence you speak of...thought all this was fairly common knowledge to be fair. Evidential breath test for alcohol is fairly well known followed by blood test for the more accurate results.
I dont need to drink at all, in fact havent had a drink for probably 2 months or more so it wouldnt worry me at all to have none.. How bout you? ?
Your argument seems to be about how unfair it is for a dope user to not get a job due to his choice of drug.
When in actual fact, that choice is yours and yours alone. Your responsibility full stop.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

Ok, so what is thew word of the experts then? Because the common knowledge I'm aware of is that since it is an illegal drug, any amount indicating it has been used is unnacceptable; rather than like the BAC limit which is based on the user being heavily impaired at the time of testing.
Been alcohol free for 3 or 4 years now.
That is my point, and your 'actual fact' does absolutely nothing to address the point that it is unfairly harshly tested for under the guise of impairment when compared to other potentially impairing drugs like alcohol. Your argument is like saying it is fair to charge us bikers $7,000 a year in rego because we can choose not to ride; an ability to choose has nothing to do with how fair something is. You want to show it is fair, then prove getting stoned on friday night gives the same level of impairment come monday morning as a 6pack breakfast; because that is how the level of impairment is compared.

[Grubber]

Ok, so what is thew word of the experts then? Because the common knowledge I'm aware of is that since it is an illegal drug, any amount indicating it has been used is unnacceptable; rather than like the BAC limit which is based on the user being heavily impaired at the time of testing.
Been alcohol free for 3 or 4 years now.
That is my point, and your 'actual fact' does absolutely nothing to address the point that it is unfairly harshly tested for under the guise of impairment when compared to other potentially impairing drugs like alcohol. Your argument is like saying it is fair to charge us bikers $7,000 a year in rego because we can choose not to ride; an ability to choose has nothing to do with how fair something is. You want to show it is fair, then prove getting stoned on friday night gives the same level of impairment come monday morning as a 6pack breakfast; because that is how the level of impairment is compared.

Its sounds like you want us as employers to allow you the user to accomodate an illegal drug. Not sure why we should.
It does impair, like it or not, how much becomes irrelevant in that case.
In comparison to alcohol, we make no exception for either.
If you arrive to work after a 6 pack breakfast as you say, you wont have a job either.
Not sure what it is you dont understand about that.
It is fullstop unacceptable to have either in your system whilst operating any machinery.
Maybe if you stopped trying to make it our problem that you smoke dope or drink or whatever you may do and take responsibility for your own choices it would stop being and issue for the employer.
Regardless of the ammounts of either substance.
Like someone said earlier, people need to be responsible for themselves, just like us the employer is by not accepting these drugs in our workplace. Our choice, your choice.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

[bogan]

Its sounds like you want us as employers to allow you the user to accomodate an illegal drug. Not sure why we should.
It does impair, like it or not, how much becomes irrelevant in that case.
In comparison to alcohol, we make no exception for either.
If you arrive to work after a 6 pack breakfast as you say, you wont have a job either.
Not sure what it is you dont understand about that.
It is fullstop unacceptable to have either in your system whilst operating any machinery.
Maybe if you stopped trying to make it our problem that you smoke dope or drink or whatever you may do and take responsibility for your own choices it would stop being and issue for the employer.
Regardless of the ammounts of either substance.
Like someone said earlier, people need to be responsible for themselves, just like us the employer is by not accepting these drugs in our workplace. Our choice, your choice.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

Not at all, as I've already said a number of times, upholding the law is a good enough reason. However you take it a few steps further and treat users of it as lesser people; that blind judgement is what I disagree with.
Evidence that it significantly impairs throughout the period that it is detectable please. You keep trying to make this point but never back it up.
Really, do you test to a more stringent BAC level than police do then? How about one beer for breakfast, keep your job? Cos that stays in system and impairs you.
You need to wake up and stop treating people as lesser beings simply because their drug of choice is different to 'mainstream' NZ'rs. Anyone with a smidge of objectivity can see the testing between them is vastly skewed to penalise one more than the other; I fail to see why you try so hard to hold on to the illusion it is not.

[trustme]

Its sounds like you want us as employers to allow you the user to accomodate an illegal drug. Not sure why we should.
It does impair, like it or not, how much becomes irrelevant in that case.
In comparison to alcohol, we make no exception for either.
If you arrive to work after a 6 pack breakfast as you say, you wont have a job either.
Not sure what it is you dont understand about that.
It is fullstop unacceptable to have either in your system whilst operating any machinery.
Maybe if you stopped trying to make it our problem that you smoke dope or drink or whatever you may do and take responsibility for your own choices it would stop being and issue for the employer.
Regardless of the ammounts of either substance.
Like someone said earlier, people need to be responsible for themselves, just like us the employer is by not accepting these drugs in our workplace. Our choice, your choice.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

Stop wasting your time. The fucktards will keep taking drugs or turning up to work pissed. You & I will continue to sack them. Same old same old. They end up being unemployable [ I know a few like that ] , then it is everyone else fault, & it's so unfair .

[Grubber]

Not at all, as I've already said a number of times, upholding the law is a good enough reason. However you take it a few steps further and treat users of it as lesser people; that blind judgement is what I disagree with.
Evidence that it significantly impairs throughout the period that it is detectable please. You keep trying to make this point but never back it up.
Really, do you test to a more stringent BAC level than police do then? How about one beer for breakfast, keep your job? Cos that stays in system and impairs you.
You need to wake up and stop treating people as lesser beings simply because their drug of choice is different to 'mainstream' NZ'rs. Anyone with a smidge of objectivity can see the testing between them is vastly skewed to penalise one more than the other; I fail to see why you try so hard to hold on to the illusion it is not.

You can have alcohol detected on the breath correct. From this it is evident it is in your system. From that point you can do a variety of tests to determine if it will effect impairment. Correct.
Dope can be similar. First test detects it in the system. Next one determines how much.
At our level we detect and then we stand down till we are comfortable that it is at an acceptable level. Which is nil.
How the experts determine those levels isnt my department but I do trust them to have that sorted.
Jeez im not even sure I know how they sorted the breath alcohol bit but I do trust them to have done it properly.
We have accepted alcohol testing on our roads for years, how is it that you are not prepared to accept the testing for dope.
I can answer that!
You dont want to cause it doesnt suit your choices anymore.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

[Grubber]

Stop wasting your time. The fucktards will keep taking drugs or turning up to work pissed. You & I will continue to sack them. Same old same old. They end up being unemployable [ I know a few like that ] , then it is everyone else fault, & it's so unfair .

My God you are so right. They seem to be looking for an escape clause all the time. Like we should treat them differently to anyone else. Im quite happy to get rid of anyone who uses dope or alcohol on the job. If they were more professional about their personal life they might actually get somewhere.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

[bogan]

You can have alcohol detected on the breath correct. From this it is evident it is in your system. From that point you can do a variety of tests to determine if it will effect impairment. Correct.
Dope can be similar. First test detects it in the system. Next one determines how much.
At our level we detect and then we stand down till we are comfortable that it is at an acceptable level. Which is nil.
How the experts determine those levels isnt my department but I do trust them to have that sorted.
Jeez im not even sure I know how they sorted the breath alcohol bit but I do trust them to have done it properly.
We have accepted alcohol testing on our roads for years, how is it that you are not prepared to accept the testing for dope.
I can answer that!
You dont want to cause it doesnt suit your choices anymore.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

"From that point you can do a variety of tests to determine if it will effect impairment."

"At our level we detect and then we stand down till we are comfortable that it is at an acceptable level. Which is nil."

See the difference, one gets tested for impairment and one for presence; doesn't sound like they are being treated equally at all to me.

I'll spell it out for you again, dope is illegal, therefor any level is unacceptable and the law; thus the experts need not bother with impairment level.

Don't want to do what? and to what choices do you refer?

[bogan]

My God you are so right. They seem to be looking for fair treatment all the time. Like we should treat them as equals. Im quite happy to get rid of anyone who uses alcohol on the job, or dope at all. If they were more professional about their personal life they might actually get somewhere.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk

I noticed a few points that don't stack up with your earlier comment, please accept my ammendments

That last sentence stacks up though, I mean who could think you personal life was none of your employers business eh

[Grubber]

"From that point you can do a variety of tests to determine if it will effect impairment."

"At our level we detect and then we stand down till we are comfortable that it is at an acceptable level. Which is nil."

See the difference, one gets tested for impairment and one for presence; doesn't sound like they are being treated equally at all to me.

I'll spell it out for you again, dope is illegal, therefor any level is unacceptable and the law; thus the experts need not bother with impairment level.

Don't want to do what? and to what choices do you refer?

Fuck me bro. It applys to both.
Simple really. If you smoke dope your down if you drink and get tested equally your fuckin down
Read the bloody thing properly.
Either way just don't do either if you want a job with me.
How fuckin hard is that to understand.
Noy even sure why I need to justify that.
If one of my trucks ploughed into your car and killed ya kids becuase the driver had one or both in his system, you would want to know why he was even behind the wheel for sure. You would have the placards up if that happened.

Sent from my GT-I9300T using Tapatalk