Above the law?

By Master Sparks
Published/Last Modified on Wednesday, June 3, 2009 11:43 AM CDT

Can I get a deffinite answer as to how and why 2 groups of people that are paid with our tax money are exempt for drug screens for pre-employment or even after they are injured on the job, much less for insurrance purposes as they tell the working stiff the reason for their random tests are administered. Educators and legislators. Just what makes them above the law? Here in Iberia parish it's a re-occurring problem and not with just teachers , but principles. What do they have on the judicial system to by-pass the drug screens when all industries have to take them? Can anyone give us a true exact reason for them to slip thru the crack( and smoke it) ( couldn't help with the pun)? This crap that the union protects them is wearing thin in Iberia Parish. If it were so simply all crafts would go union and save a lot of money on testing. As for those elected parasites in office, a little randon testing would get rid of a few as long as it could be kept a secret prior to testing.

Advertisement

Copyright © 2009 The Daily Iberian

Comments

    Taxpayer wrote on Jun 16, 2009 3:16 PM:

    " If I have to be test to give my money, they should be tested to get it!! No more needs to be said. "

    Master Sparks wrote on Jun 14, 2009 6:14 AM:

    " OK js, You're an educator, I used to be one. But no one has answered my question, Want to try ,or do people in the education business not wanting to say for fear it gets turned around? "

    js wrote on Jun 12, 2009 9:01 PM:

    " Master Sparks:
    I was referring to the comment you put about you must smoke so much dope. Actually, I am not on food stamps and I don't do drugs. I am an educator. I see students bully other students with comments such as yours and that just leads me to believe that you probably had a troubled childhood. You probably bullied other students at your school. We educators try to stifle the rude comments that students make to others. So, where are your manners? I in no way want to support these drugheads. I pay enough to the deadheads. "

    To Invasion of privacy wrote on Jun 10, 2009 11:30 AM:

    " Companies have the right AND the responsibility to have a safe working environment. Their company insurance would be outrageous if they didn't. You want to work, abide by the rules. It's simple as that.

    The only invasion I see here are the stupid idiots that go to work loaded, get loaded on the job or come in with a hangover which puts every person working there at risk. Would you want to pay the bill if loaded Joe Blow caused the death to your employees or damage to business site? I say test away! "

    Master Sparks wrote on Jun 10, 2009 7:25 AM:

    " To js: To defend free money with no repricussions by you, speaks volumes. Are you defending druggies?For the life of me I can't find anything nice to say about free loading off the system at the present rate by people taking hard earned cash from tax payers to live a criminal lifstyle . My mom told me if your not part of the solution then you are the problem. Who's side are you on? How much crack do you trade for with your food stamps? For my original question, is still not answered. "

    The Real Me wrote on Jun 9, 2009 9:11 PM:

    " To me,
    I am sure the costs of the tests would surely be less than the costs of the benefits we are paying. One test and a referral for drug treatment and employment training with completion of both programs before they can request the benefits again. Then upon failure of a second test a permanent ban on applications from them. I bet this would slim down the roles on the free ride, but alas our wonderful government does not have the stones to do this!!! "

    js wrote on Jun 8, 2009 4:21 PM:

    " To Master Sparks:
    Your rude comments are uncalled for. Someone made a comment. If YOUR comment was an ugly comment, then do as my mother used to tell me, "If you don't have anything nice to say, then don't say anything at all." Where are your manners? "

    Invasion of privacy wrote on Jun 6, 2009 12:26 PM:

    " Random drug testing is nothing more than spying. Your company makes you pee in a cup so they can see if you are doing something they don't like when you are not at work.

    I don't understand why everyone doesn't find this as horrifying as I do. "

    Master Sparks wrote on Jun 5, 2009 10:38 PM:

    " To me: The # of people knocked off the free food chain would generate a vast war chest of money and quickly Lets see maybe 50 dollars a test and no more $1000 pay out to a druggy and you get a savings of $950 ,gee you must smoke so much dope you can't comprehend the savings. "

    To Me wrote on Jun 5, 2009 8:53 PM:

    " Yes, it would be costly,but just think about how much of our money won't be going out to pay for drug heads. I would rather pay for a drug test than for the druggy to get my money for the rest of his/her life. I promise you that not many would be on welfare if they were drug tested because they would not be able to pass the drug test. "

    get the facts straight wrote on Jun 5, 2009 6:03 PM:

    " just to let you know, teachers are drug tested. Teachers can randomly be drug tested just like other professions. Also if a teacher is injured on the job, the first thing he/she has to do is get drug tested. "

    Double Standards Exists Cmon. wrote on Jun 5, 2009 4:41 PM:

    " What are the requirements for being a teacher? A bachelors degree in education...maybe a masters for administrators? A probational semester and in class training? State certification? But no drug testing? Wow...I can see the posters in the guidance counselors office now...
    "Teaching...it's not just for alcoholics anymore."
    "Worried about drug testing? Not us!"
    "Sick of spoiled kids and ungrateful parents? We've got a secret!"
    If anyone should be allowed to smoke a little pot, it's the teachers. They get so little for giving so much. "

    Pot Stirring for Pot Smokers wrote on Jun 5, 2009 4:16 PM:

    " Why would some teachers and school administrators turn to smoking pot to calm their nervers, or maybe give them a boost in creativity to deal with the generally spoiled, disrespectful, uninterested, and lazy students they have to face on a day to day basis? Think about it this way...what's more important? What a person does in their free time, or the results they produce on the job? If you found out the president of a very profitable company you invested in smokes pot in his free time, would you sell your stock? "

    Good Point wrote on Jun 5, 2009 4:00 PM:

    " I'm not in disagreement. I believe ANY job candidate who will be responsible for the safety of coworkers, the use of company equipment, training, etc. should be subject to a drug test as part of the hiring process. Elected people go through a campaign process where skeletons are dragged from closets...yet we've had presidents who've done cocaine and marijuana. The truth is, you can't weed everybody out (pardon the pun) because not all users are "dope heads". It goes without saying that real dope heads are unemployable except for simple tasks...it's getting them to show up. "

    Interesting wrote on Jun 5, 2009 12:23 PM:

    " This happened not long ago in our parish. Driver, who was a teacher admitted in witness statement the use of drugs and alcohol the night before the accident. Why, because it most likely was going to show up in toxocology report as this driver was tested by the law. Should teachers be tested for drugs......darn right they should be tested by the school system. They spend more time around our children than parents do during the hours of the day. If you are not guilty, you should have no problem being tested. "

    Entertained wrote on Jun 4, 2009 9:57 PM:

    " To Good Point: To answer your question "who needs the testing" ? "We the people" who want our children educated by persons who have standards ,morales and our childrens best in mind. Not closet dope heads. "Who needs the testing?" All individuals recieving money from the hard working tax payers in any way shape or form. "

    Master Sparks wrote on Jun 4, 2009 9:50 PM:

    " To Good Point: Thanks for the compliment ,but,I'm not about accusations. Recently one teacher was injured in an accident yet when the question about a drug screening came up,the final word was it couldn't be done because he was a teacher. What gives with that. In industry you get hurt ,you're automatically tested . If found under the influence you're on your own. No help,period. Only right. Yes they should be held to a higher standard, but the record of late dictates drugs are at all levels , especially in leadership roles, Two principles, in a couple of years. "

    Good Point wrote on Jun 4, 2009 3:09 PM:

    " You bring up a very good point. Private industry is more concerned about liability than the government (ever try to sue the government?), therefor they must prove that they take "extra" steps to provide a safe working environment. The government doesn't have that concern and most government workers probably have more time to "relax". But teachers are held to a higher standard. If a teacher is suspected of drug use, a career can be ruined by mere accusations...and people would rather believe rumors...so who needs a test? "

    Me wrote on Jun 4, 2009 2:24 PM:

    " Yes, the people who receive government aid should be drug tested but can you imagine the cost for such tests? "

    What about.. wrote on Jun 4, 2009 11:12 AM:

    " Welfare recipients???? "

    Kay wrote on Jun 4, 2009 6:30 AM:

    " Post office employees only get drug screened when they are first hired on. No randoms or if they are injured. Heck, a lot would lose their job if they would be screened at random. "

    Master Sparks wrote on Jun 4, 2009 5:29 AM:

    " Maybe in hindsight I should have titled this "Above Reproach". The point I'm in question about is what is their leverage to be free to do drugs and no testing can be administered,even after an accident, as is the case in industry. For that fact ,why aren't recipients ( welfare, public housing, food stamps, all government workers) of my tax money tested to recieve it , but I'm tested to make it? Please don't skirt the issue 'I'd like a clear answer. "

    What law wrote on Jun 3, 2009 12:05 PM:

    " Above what law? I work at a large bank and was not drug screened nor does my company do random drug screening. "

WRITE A COMMENT

Use the form below to post a brief comment related to this story. Use the word count tool to assist you in keeping your remarks to 100 words or fewer.

•Comments must be approved by an editor or the publisher before appearing on the Web site but are not verified for accuracy nor have we verified the identity of any person supposedly posting an comment. Please consider this as you consider any statement made. A thoughtful contribution to the online discussion is appreciated.

• Please note your comments must attempt to follow basic rules of grammar and punctuation or they will not be posted. Do not use unfamiliar abbreviations or text-like short cuts, like ur for your. Please keep your tone civil. You can say someone's idea is stupid but you cannot say someone is stupid.

• Comments should deal with matters of public concern. Problems with private individuals or private companies are not likely to get posted.

• Questions or comments about items posted should be e-mailed to dailyiberian@bellsouth.net.

(optional)
Current Word Count:
   

Classifieds

Jobs

Jobs

View All Jobs

Homes

Homes

View All Homes

Autos

Autos

View All Autos


Contact Us

Subscribe
Vacation Hold
General Email

Mailing Address:
The Daily Iberian
P.O. Box 9290
New Iberia, LA
70562-9290

Street Address:
926 East Main St.
New Iberia, LA 70560

Phone:
(337) 365-6773

Fax:
(337)-367-9640

Inside Louisiana:
800-365-6773

Local Weather