Probably not. This was discussed extensively on trainorders and it's most prevalent among maintenance staff--not engineers, conductors, OBS, or anyone actually running the train. While the numbers are higher than freight personnel, that's mostly a functional of how low they are in that sector. I remember seeing that there were 17 failed tests last year, out of thousands of employees.It appears as though Amtrak management is failing to deal effectively with a substance abuse problem within it's ranks according to this article. Is this a cause for concern?
i guess i'm glad you don't see it as a problem. as i read the article it talks about "operating employees in safety sensitive positions" and that very few employees are actually tested. oh, and a positive test doesn't mean you are fired. i guess i'm just old fashionedProbably not. This was discussed extensively on trainorders and it's most prevalent among maintenance staff--not engineers, conductors, OBS, or anyone actually running the train. While the numbers are higher than freight personnel, that's mostly a functional of how low they are in that sector. I remember seeing that there were 17 failed tests last year, out of thousands of employees.It appears as though Amtrak management is failing to deal effectively with a substance abuse problem within it's ranks according to this article. Is this a cause for concern?
I'm not worried.
i agree. evidently the amtrak contract doesn'tAnyone involved in operations of transportation systems should face the Death Penalty is found to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol during their tour of duty. They are putting lives at danger and need to be "rewarded" justly. Plain and simple-no argument needed here.
I too agree. When it comes to public safety there should be mandatory testing for ALL with a zero tolerance policy and no union representation of those violators. Even though in college I did inhale... once, my views have really changed on this subject as time wore on and I had to be a responsible role model for our children. On the other hand this helps explain the wide variety of answers when it comes to policies, they are all high :lol: and making it up on the fly.i agree. evidently the amtrak contract doesn'tAnyone involved in operations of transportation systems should face the Death Penalty is found to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol during their tour of duty. They are putting lives at danger and need to be "rewarded" justly. Plain and simple-no argument needed here.
Just to add to what Shortline noted in his post, what you seek here would also require major changes in Federal laws. The union must represent the person under the current laws no matter what; they have no choice. It's kind of like the "Innocent until proven guilty" principal in our justice system.and no union representation of those violators.
I didn't say it wasn't a problem. That wasn't the original question. I just don't see it as a concern. The news organizations reporting this matter have grossly overstated the seriousness of the situation. Show me an actual threat to the safety of the railroad and I'll be concerned. This is ultimately a minor matter that's only getting a lot of play because it's bash-Amtrak season.i guess i'm glad you don't see it as a problem. as i read the article it talks about "operating employees in safety sensitive positions" and that very few employees are actually tested. oh, and a positive test doesn't mean you are fired. i guess i'm just old fashionedProbably not. This was discussed extensively on trainorders and it's most prevalent among maintenance staff--not engineers, conductors, OBS, or anyone actually running the train. While the numbers are higher than freight personnel, that's mostly a functional of how low they are in that sector. I remember seeing that there were 17 failed tests last year, out of thousands of employees.It appears as though Amtrak management is failing to deal effectively with a substance abuse problem within it's ranks according to this article. Is this a cause for concern?
I'm not worried.
I agree with this. It really doesn't sound like its a huge safety issue, and the thing about marijuana is that it can stay in your system for weeks. So its not like these people are necessarily showing up to work high.I didn't say it wasn't a problem. That wasn't the original question. I just don't see it as a concern. The news organizations reporting this matter have grossly overstated the seriousness of the situation. Show me an actual threat to the safety of the railroad and I'll be concerned. This is ultimately a minor matter that's only getting a lot of play because it's bash-Amtrak season.i guess i'm glad you don't see it as a problem. as i read the article it talks about "operating employees in safety sensitive positions" and that very few employees are actually tested. oh, and a positive test doesn't mean you are fired. i guess i'm just old fashionedProbably not. This was discussed extensively on trainorders and it's most prevalent among maintenance staff--not engineers, conductors, OBS, or anyone actually running the train. While the numbers are higher than freight personnel, that's mostly a functional of how low they are in that sector. I remember seeing that there were 17 failed tests last year, out of thousands of employees.It appears as though Amtrak management is failing to deal effectively with a substance abuse problem within it's ranks according to this article. Is this a cause for concern?
I'm not worried.
i assume the employees knew it was a condition of employment that they test negative for certain substances and that there were reasons for that requirement. they did not meet these conditions of employment.It really doesn't sound like its a huge safety issue, and the thing about marijuana is that it can stay in your system for weeks. So its not like these people are necessarily showing up to work high.
That just means they showed up high to work weeks ago rather than the day they're tested. And behavior is part of the discernment process, it seems.I agree with this. It really doesn't sound like its a huge safety issue, and the thing about marijuana is that it can stay in your system for weeks. So its not like these people are necessarily showing up to work high.
Possibly, OR they sparked up on their day off.That just means they showed up high to work weeks ago rather than the day they're tested. And behavior is part of the discernment process, it seems.I agree with this. It really doesn't sound like its a huge safety issue, and the thing about marijuana is that it can stay in your system for weeks. So its not like these people are necessarily showing up to work high.
The death penalty is a little ridiculous over the top, however.i agree. evidently the amtrak contract doesn'tAnyone involved in operations of transportation systems should face the Death Penalty is found to be under the influence of drugs or alcohol during their tour of duty. They are putting lives at danger and need to be "rewarded" justly. Plain and simple-no argument needed here.
No, I don't think so, and I've felt that way ever since an operator at the Galveston drawbridge offered me a toke one night while I was out on the bridge railfanning. (Safe to say, I refused.)The death penalty is a little ridiculous over the top, however.
Everyone should read the BLET response that George is referring to. It is fact-based, something that both the Washington Post and Bloomberg don't seem to be interested in here.
I am totally disgusted by the way the media has been reporting this story. "4 times more likely to fail drug tests" vs "no engineers" - media based story on the worst subcategory - that's the headline - yeah the media have to sell news to sell ads - that's their "business model"
Exactly - the test might come up positive because someone smoked on their day off. I could really care less if adults want to hit the ganja on their day off. But then again I think marijuana should be legalized, so take my comments with a grain of salt if you disagree.Possibly, OR they sparked up on their day off.That just means they showed up high to work weeks ago rather than the day they're tested. And behavior is part of the discernment process, it seems.I agree with this. It really doesn't sound like its a huge safety issue, and the thing about marijuana is that it can stay in your system for weeks. So its not like these people are necessarily showing up to work high.
We have a winner right here! About a year ago the city proposed random drug tests for police officers and you never heard such a hue and cry - this from the folks who always say 'If you're not doing anything illegal you have nothing to worry about. Substance abuse problems cross all societal lines.I wonder what kind of results we would see if we began random D&A testing on politicians & journalists while they were on the clock?
Drug test the wonderful enforcers? won't happen. I've met too many cops who partake of the confiscated "good stuff".We have a winner right here! About a year ago the city proposed random drug tests for police officers and you never heard such a hue and cry - this from the folks who always say 'If you're not doing anything illegal you have nothing to worry about. Substance abuse problems cross all societal lines.I wonder what kind of results we would see if we began random D&A testing on politicians & journalists while they were on the clock?
I have no problem with post-accident testing, and can see some benefit of randoms, but why does society only demand this of a certain few occupations? I'm talking about government mandates here, not a private company's policies.
On the other hand I do have a problem with the way this treats people as presumed guilty. Without getting into details, if you have ever been falsely accused you will treasure the classic tenet of American justice of innocent until proven guilty.
Enter your email address to join: