News (Media Awareness Project) - US HI: Editorial: Split Decision On Drug Tests |
Title: | US HI: Editorial: Split Decision On Drug Tests |
Published On: | 2007-04-28 |
Source: | Maui News, The (HI) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-12 07:07:51 |
SPLIT DECISION ON DRUG TESTS
The dispute over mandatory random drug testing of public school
teachers boils down to concern about the welfare of students versus a
violation of individual rights. That makes it a serious issue.
There is no doubt the welfare of students is paramount, but is the way
government treats its employees that much less important? The governor
has said making the drug and alcohol testing part of a union contract
is not negotiable. The Hawaii State Teachers Association board of
directors has put the contract including the testing out for
ratification without a recommendation, something of a first for a
government union. Since a pay raise is involved, it's likely the
contract will be ratified.
Details of the testing would be worked out during negotiations between
the HSTA and the state. At stake is a 4 percent annual raise over two
years and the professional standing of some 13,000 teachers. One Big
Island teacher said the drug and alcohol testing treats teachers as if
they were prison parolees.
A problem with random drug testing is the possibility of false
positives due to the ingestion of perfectly legal, nonintoxicating
drugs. In the case of a teacher, a false positive would be a permanent
stain, much like an accused sex offender who is proven innocent. The
accusation never goes away.
The argument that a teacher predisposed to using illegal drugs might
champion them in class is bogus. A teacher could be a devout follower
of a particular religion but would not espouse that religion in class.
As for recent examples of teachers found guilty of using and selling
drugs, the number is so tiny a percentage of the work force as to be
inconsequential.
Although ruled legal in many instances, mandatory drug testing appears
a violation of constitutional bans on invasion of privacy and forcing
individuals to testify against themselves.
The biggest problem with the governor's position is the fact it
singles out just one group of state employees. If random drug testing
is going to be required by the state, the testing should apply to all
employees, including legislators, judges, department heads and the
governor.
The dispute over mandatory random drug testing of public school
teachers boils down to concern about the welfare of students versus a
violation of individual rights. That makes it a serious issue.
There is no doubt the welfare of students is paramount, but is the way
government treats its employees that much less important? The governor
has said making the drug and alcohol testing part of a union contract
is not negotiable. The Hawaii State Teachers Association board of
directors has put the contract including the testing out for
ratification without a recommendation, something of a first for a
government union. Since a pay raise is involved, it's likely the
contract will be ratified.
Details of the testing would be worked out during negotiations between
the HSTA and the state. At stake is a 4 percent annual raise over two
years and the professional standing of some 13,000 teachers. One Big
Island teacher said the drug and alcohol testing treats teachers as if
they were prison parolees.
A problem with random drug testing is the possibility of false
positives due to the ingestion of perfectly legal, nonintoxicating
drugs. In the case of a teacher, a false positive would be a permanent
stain, much like an accused sex offender who is proven innocent. The
accusation never goes away.
The argument that a teacher predisposed to using illegal drugs might
champion them in class is bogus. A teacher could be a devout follower
of a particular religion but would not espouse that religion in class.
As for recent examples of teachers found guilty of using and selling
drugs, the number is so tiny a percentage of the work force as to be
inconsequential.
Although ruled legal in many instances, mandatory drug testing appears
a violation of constitutional bans on invasion of privacy and forcing
individuals to testify against themselves.
The biggest problem with the governor's position is the fact it
singles out just one group of state employees. If random drug testing
is going to be required by the state, the testing should apply to all
employees, including legislators, judges, department heads and the
governor.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...