April 9th, 2013

tats

A barely coherent rant about workplace drug testing. Sorry, short of time today.

So does it count as a sleep in when you wake up at 4:30am and doze until your alarm goes off at 6:30? Because I think if that's what I'm going to get, I'll take it. ;-/

Meanwhile, this morning we discussed putting another blanket on the bed. Summer is over, isn't it? *sadface* But, on the upside, it's not long till my birthday! And also, graduation! And before either of those, Psychedelic Science! The next month or so is pretty exciting! Here is another exclamation mark!

*ahem*

Collapse )

So what does drug testing achieve really? I mean, apart from screening out those who refuse - the potential troublemakers - and ensuring that our workforce is compliant with whatever demands employers might make on their bodies and privacy, both in and out of working hours? Which is, let's face it, in line with the government's stated goal of producing a 'flexible workforce'. If you'll submit to drug testing, you're probably ok with casualisation, split shifts, and erosions of worker rights such as, you know, the minimum wage or the requirement for due process before being sacked. Remember the guy up there, sacked on the spot for a positive drug test that turned out to be false? Hmm..

It seems to me that what it does is make little old ladies pee in cups for the sake of being seen to be doing something, and line the pockets of those with a vested interest in popularising drug testing, while driving those with potential problems underground and encouraging the use of more dangerous drugs. Surely having employment policies that allow employers and employees to work together if and when a problem is identified is more likely to have a positive result?

Fie.
tats

(no subject)

I am somewhat taken aback at the amount of joy I am seeing expressed regarding the death of Margaret Thatcher.

I saw less over Osama Bin Laden.

I was a teenager when she came to power, and her policies (or our government's adoption of them) affected my early life in many negative ways. I detest neoliberalism and what it stands for, because I believe it lacks compassion. I understand that this lack of compassion has led to tangible disadvantages in an ongoing way for a lot of people. In short, Thatcher was responsible for a great deal of deep and abiding suffering in the world.

But to feel joy at someone's death, and to proclaim it so gleefully? I can't get on board with that. Sorry.

[edit] It seems Russell Brand and I have this in common then. "if you opposed Thatcher's ideas it is likely because of their lack of compassion, which is really just a word for love. If love is something you cherish it is hard to glean much joy from death, even in one's enemies."