Is my old company guilty of anything?

What was the job you were hired for? As far as I know, drug screening is up to the employer. I don’t believe they have to legally screen anyone. I imagine if you were a driver, they would have needed to for their insurance, but that’s something different.

Did you simply work for the truck stop or were you hired as a driver? I must be some kind of lunatic liberal, but unless you were hired as a driver then why would you need or want or expect or be upset because there was not drug test? It’s no one’s business, as long as you can do your job.

@Seaofclouds : I was a CSR at Travel Centers of America. It was just odd because the contract says they will not hire me under any circumstances unless I have a drug test come back negative, and they put me behind a register without training or a drug test, I was thinking maybe the legal squids knew if this broke any kind of laws.

@lillycoyote : This isn’t a pursual of legal action and I’m not upset. I’m just frankly astonished and curious that a national corporation like TA would allow a GM to act in such a relaxed, and, for the company, dangerous manner.

This is more a question of curiousity than anything else.

I think it’s illegal to be drug tested anyhow.
drivers are required.

There’s nothing wrong with or illegal about a company that fails to enforce a drug screen.
It’s wrong of them to even have a drug screen, so the more lenient the better. If they want to save money by not always enforcing the screen, then good.

They should just test dexterity, reaction time, and intelligence, and go with that. Any drivers who are shown to be less-than-good, should be fired, whether or not they use drugs.

The only way this would be illegal is that if the drug screening must be done by State or Federal mandate. I can’t even name off the top of my head if there are any…(Oil rig workers? Pilots? Truck drivers?) Writing that down in their contract and then not doing it, it’s their discretion and not illegal.

I don’t think drug screening is always wrong, but having evidence of drug use and actually being under the influence is two different things, in my view. On a Monday morning, I’d rather work with someone who may have smoked a bit of weed on the Friday night, than someone who sat and drank all weekend and comes in with a hangover. Context.

Drug tests are neither legal nor illegal. They are simply condition of employment.

Employment is “employment at will.” Unless you sign a contract with a job agreeing to certain conditions, you can generally quit a job at any time, for any reason. If you quit because you felt you weren’t given adequate training, unless they are trying to hold you financially liable for something that happened while you worked there, move on and forget that you chose the wrong job for you. Don’t list it on your work history.

Your company can perform that drug test whenever they want. It doesn’t need to be before they hire you.

Police officers can be screened for drugs at any time, day or night. this is understandable. in your situation, its TAs liability, if they did not test you before and during your employment. there is no set rule on drug screening. its mainly a condition of employment and up to the individual employer. when you were hired, you most likely signed a paper stating you would submit to a drug screening test at any time.

It’s likely they included the clause in the contract so they could terminate your employment if you failed a drug screen. probably in response to an incident or suspicion. Otherwise, as long as you’re not actually under the influence while on the job, they couldn’t terminate you for that cause, and depending on the state, might have a hard time letting you go. That is, they might face a wrongful termination lawsuit.

Also @PandoraBoxx—some states “at-will” employment is a little more nebulous: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_at_will#Implied_contract_exceptions and the next section in that article. It can make it difficult to fire an employee for no reason (although most of my California contracts at least have included a clause that I could be terminated for no reason)

No, it is totally up to them what they do about the drug screen.

Did you sign a document referring to drug testing? If yes, too bad.
If no. You don’t have to.

It should be noted that some companies, including many transportation companies are required by the federal government to test their employees. This may have to due with their federal contracts, I’m not sure.

But even then, I think it’s appropriate to look the other way, and not force the tests on employees.

Drug tests are stupid because an alcoholic methamphetamine-using thief can pass the test with flying colors by staying clean for 3 days, whereas the otherwise clean-living pot user, who is far less dangerous, will show up positive for up to a month or so.

This results in transportation companies hiring an inordinate amount of druggies because they think they are “drug free” when they are not.

Drug tests are dangerous for everyone.

No. The drug screening is performed at their discretion.

@ChazMaz : Yeah, I did, and it said a drug test would be performed before my hiring n and first day of work, upon which everything hinges. They never did, and I was there and left, and nothing. ‘Twas just weird.
@Kraigmo : the guy training me had a pack of cigarettes during my 8 hour shift, couldn’t sit still or slow down and kept talking about buying and selling meth from some Hispanic immigrants. 2 guesses what he was amped up on…

@Everyone: Thanks for your answers. The world can be an odd place sometimes.

If anything your company is guilty of double standards and an obvious ‘blind eye’. Unfortunately, these things never come to light until lives are lost. You know what a ‘whistle blower’ is?