# Should Uber and Lyft enforce drug testing policies?



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

I had a rider tell me the other day that there was a driver that tried to sell him pot before he exited the car. He also told me that he thought that he thought the guy was smoking a joint prior to him getting in the car. He told me that he reported this to uber. But do you think uber/lyft should enforce drug testing policies and if so how do you enforce it?

In my opinion I think that we should have a drug testing policy in place. In fact I would welcome it. I think it would also gain consumer confidence once they are aware of these policies in place.

Any thoughts suggestions on how we could implement such a policy?

Or do you think this would be way too difficult for these companies to do?

Also what would happen to Uber/Lyft if states start mandating that this should be done. What do you think would happen to Uber/Lyft.


----------



## frndthDuvel (Aug 31, 2014)

Only at time of hire.


----------



## KGB7 (Apr 23, 2015)

Every 6month and Uber pays for it.


----------



## rob_la (May 19, 2015)

I think it's a good idea, not only would it be ultimately safer for riders, but it would also thin the driver pool since some drivers will not want to submit to drug testing. This means less drivers and more rides for me.


----------



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

rob_la said:


> I think it's a good idea, not only would it be ultimately safer for riders, but it would also thin the driver pool since some drivers will not want to submit to drug testing. This means less drivers and more rides for me.


It kinda of shocks me that people are voting no to this, so does that mean they are doing drugs and don't want to submit to the drug testing policy? I can't seem to wrap my head around why you wouldn't want this as a driver or as a company.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

No. YOU own your company, YOU should establish and enforce a drug testing policy.

Uber couldn't if they wanted to. You're not an employee. What they could do is establish in the agreement that you are required to have a policy and confirm that you follow it.

It's also none of their damned business what you do on your off time. Why people sprint towards the trashcan to throw their rights away, like your right to privacy, is beyond me.


----------



## rob_la (May 19, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> No. YOU own your company, YOU should establish and enforce a drug testing policy.
> 
> Uber couldn't if they wanted to. You're not an employee. What they could do is establish in the agreement that you are required to have a policy and confirm that you follow it.
> 
> If they COULD, SHOULD they? No. It's none of their damned business what you do on your off time.


They could easily establish and enforce a drug testing policy, all they need to do is include it in your Uber Partner contract. There's no legal reason why independent contractor status would make a difference.

It's not uncommon for commercial drivers to submit to drug testing. Whether what you do in your personal life is anyone else's business is a different argument entirely, but all I know is it's common for truck and bus drivers to be tested regularly.

I would only view drug testing as an invasion of my privacy if I used drugs, but since I don't, a clean drug test is like a reward for living a boring life.


----------



## StephenJBlue (Sep 23, 2014)

It's a bullshit idea based upon control. If I get high on Wednesday, then don't drive until Saturday, should I be penalized? Nope.


----------



## Goober (Oct 16, 2014)

There's no way I can live this life without pot.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

rob_la said:


> I would only view drug testing as an invasion of my privacy if I used drugs, but since I don't, a clean drug test is like a reward for living a boring life.


That's like saying you would gladly let a cop search your car even though you had done nothing wrong. Nothing good can possibly come of it. You allow them to test you and you have to live with the results with no control over whether they are accurate or not. False positive? Sorry. You ate poppy seeds? Sorry.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

rob_la said:


> They could easily establish and enforce a drug testing policy, all they need to do is include it in your Uber Partner contract. There's no legal reason why independent contractor status would make a difference.


I should have said it would be very unwise for them to attempt to drug test. IC or employee is a very gray area and drug testing has been used successfully as an argument in court to establish employee status along with other criteria.


----------



## Altima ATL (Jul 13, 2015)

A drug test?

Hmmmm - I think I would fail, as I know nothing about drugs.


----------



## Slick (Sep 26, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> I had a rider tell me the other day that there was a driver that tried to sell him pot before he exited the car. He also told me that he thought that he thought the guy was smoking a joint prior to him getting in the car. He told me that he reported this to uber. But do you think uber/lyft should enforce drug testing policies and if so how do you enforce it?
> 
> In my opinion I think that we should have a drug testing policy in place. In fact I would welcome it. I think it would also gain consumer confidence once they are aware of these policies in place.
> 
> ...


It would cost the company tens of millions of dollars to implement this w all the drivers they have nation wide and world wide w the high turnover this would be an ongoing cost. The company will avoid that for as long as possible.
All the passengers that I have that comment on taxis seem to allreAdy have much greater confidence in the personalitys of uber drivers then the stereotypical taxi driver. 
Truth is taxi drivers are good people too they are just burnt out on the service standard because of the long hours day in and day out and they have as many rude customers as anybody else. 
An uber driver that drives 12 13 hours a day is generally comparable to a taxi driver, often burnt out w poor service. There of course exceptions for both.


----------



## Slick (Sep 26, 2015)

Dru


Slick said:


> It would cost the company tens of millions of dollars to implement this w all the drivers they have nation wide and world wide w the high turnover this would be an ongoing cost. The company will avoid that for as long as possible.
> All the passengers that I have that comment on taxis seem to allreAdy have much greater confidence in the personalitys of uber drivers then the stereotypical taxi driver.
> Truth is taxi drivers are good people too they are just burnt out on the service standard because of the long hours day in and day out and they have as many rude customers as anybody else.
> An uber driver that drives 12 13 hours a day is generally comparable to a taxi driver, often burnt out w poor service. There of course exceptions for both.


Drug testing will never happen unless the regulating government demands it. And client confidence is allreAdy high w the exception of the paranoid and the the stuck in there ways crowd. And from those groups we won't get much business anyway.


----------



## Uberselectguy (Oct 16, 2015)

Independent big rig drivers have to sub,it to drug testing routinely, as part of the contracts they have with their customers. You haul for Fed Ex as an independent, you get random drug testing.
Limo drivers, yes they are employees, submit as well as a part of the professionalism of the trade and to ensure customer confidence.
Uber won't do it for two reasons. They are to cheap. They don't care.


----------



## Einstein (Oct 10, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> It kinda of shocks me that people are voting no to this...... I can't seem to wrap my head around why you wouldn't want this as a driver or as a company.


Who the hell wants to go through the indignity and hassle of peeing into a cup to satisfy their driving contract with Uber.
This is a terrible idea.


----------



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

Uberselectguy said:


> Independent big rig drivers have to sub,it to drug testing routinely, as part of the contracts they have with their customers. You haul for Fed Ex as an independent, you get random drug testing.
> Limo drivers, yes they are employees, submit as well as a part of the professionalism of the trade and to ensure customer confidence.
> Uber won't do it for two reasons. They are to cheap. They don't care.


I totally agree and quite frankly I'm not surprised the DOT hasn't tried to enforce some sort of drug policy since a lot of others in dot have to do that.


----------



## RomanRon (Sep 23, 2015)

Slick said:


> It would cost the company tens of millions of dollars to implement this w all the drivers they have nation wide and world wide w the high turnover this would be an ongoing cost. The company will avoid that for as long as possible.
> All the passengers that I have that comment on taxis seem to allreAdy have much greater confidence in the personalitys of uber drivers then the stereotypical taxi driver.
> Truth is taxi drivers are good people too they are just burnt out on the service standard because of the long hours day in and day out and they have as many rude customers as anybody else.
> An uber driver that drives 12 13 hours a day is generally comparable to a taxi driver, often burnt out w poor service. There of course exceptions for both.


 Urine testing cost approx $30 dollars x 160,000 approx drivers= $4.8 mil last I heard valuation of company 70 bil although this is on paper I don't think it would be a problem and why would they have to go world wide with this? that being said I don't see this happening ....until some idiot drivers kills someone and they find drugs in system post mortem


----------



## Einstein (Oct 10, 2015)

RomanRon said:


> Urine testing cost approx $30 dollars x 160,000 approx drivers= $4.8 mil last I heard valuation of company 70 bil although this is on paper I don't think it would be a problem and why would they have to go world wide with this?


How much do you want to bet that if Uber enforced mandatory drug testing, they would require you, the Driver, to pay for these tests?


----------



## RomanRon (Sep 23, 2015)

NO bet but since they are requiring you to take test they have to pay my friend


----------



## Einstein (Oct 10, 2015)

RomanRon said:


> NO bet but since they are requiring you to take test they have to pay my friend


Didn't they make us pay $10/week for those shitty iPhone 4 devices they required us to use last year?


----------



## Dontmakemepullauonyou (Oct 13, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> I had a rider tell me the other day that there was a driver that tried to sell him pot before he exited the car. He also told me that he thought that he thought the guy was smoking a joint prior to him getting in the car. He told me that he reported this to uber. But do you think uber/lyft should enforce drug testing policies and if so how do you enforce it?
> 
> In my opinion I think that we should have a drug testing policy in place. In fact I would welcome it. I think it would also gain consumer confidence once they are aware of these policies in place.
> 
> ...


Sure they should do drug testing!

Btw what kinda drugs would we be testing?


----------



## RomanRon (Sep 23, 2015)

required? i dont think required


----------



## Goober (Oct 16, 2014)

I'd like to try whatever drugs corporate is on..


----------



## Nemo (Sep 17, 2015)

RomanRon said:


> Urine testing cost approx $30 dollars x 160,000 approx drivers= $4.8 mil last I heard valuation of company 70 bil although this is on paper I don't think it would be a problem and why would they have to go world wide with this? that being said I don't see this happening ....until some idiot drivers kills someone and they find drugs in system post mortem


less safe piss cup fee of say $10 + less 25% uber fee = > $4.8 mil


----------



## KGB7 (Apr 23, 2015)

So much stupid in this thread!

Invasion of privacy? How about you get on a plane while pilot is triping on acid.


----------



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> No. YOU own your company, YOU should establish and enforce a drug testing policy.
> 
> Uber couldn't if they wanted to. You're not an employee. What they could do is establish in the agreement that you are required to have a policy and confirm that you follow it.
> 
> It's also none of their damned business what you do on your off time. Why people sprint towards the trashcan to throw their rights away, like your right to privacy, is beyond me.


So don't truck drivers who own their own trucks and they still have to be submitted to drug testing.


----------



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

Einstein said:


> How much do you want to bet that if Uber enforced mandatory drug testing, they would require you, the Driver, to pay for these tests?


If the costs is only $30 even up to $100, I would have no problem taking a drug test. My question is if you have a problem taking a drug test then what are you trying to hide? I mean $30 bucks is a drop in the bucket and I think it is needed. I would like it if Uber/Lyft paid for these costs, but since I drive for both, I would like to pay for one test and have them sent to both companies.

I feel like since most of the transportation industry REQUIRES drug testing then why don't we as ridesharers have to be tested. If I were to use Uber or Lyft (which I do on occasions) why in the world would I want someone who may be a druggie driving me around. I wouldn't, and their are too many irresponsible people out there, just look at the drinking and driving stats do you really think the people who do drugs aren't going to drive also?


----------



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

RomanRon said:


> Urine testing cost approx $30 dollars x 160,000 approx drivers= $4.8 mil last I heard valuation of company 70 bil although this is on paper I don't think it would be a problem and why would they have to go world wide with this? that being said I don't see this happening ....until some idiot drivers kills someone and they find drugs in system post mortem


I would gladly welcome drug testing, and the sad part is, that is probably what is going to have to happen then Uber and Lyft will take a huge hit and then they will enforce a drug testing policy, I hate how companies are retroactive instead of proactive.


----------



## UberHammer (Dec 5, 2014)

pbracing33b said:


> I totally agree and quite frankly I'm not surprised the DOT hasn't tried to enforce some sort of drug policy since a lot of others in dot have to do that.


DOT only has authority over inter-state commerce. As long as the Uber driver only works in one state, DOT can't do anything about it.


----------



## itniloe (May 13, 2015)

So do cab drivers have drug testing?


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> My question is if you have a problem taking a drug test then what are you trying to hide?


This is EXACTLY how they get you to surrender your rights. If you have nothing to hide, let me search you. If you have nothing to hide, let me search your car. If you have nothing to hide, let me search your house.

It has NOTHING to do with guilt. I don't do drugs. I do realise that when you surrender rights, you never get them back. They are there to protect the innocent, not the guilty.

Let me ask you this, when you get deactivated for a false positive from a contaminated sample, then how will you feel about voluntarily surrendering bodily fluids for testing over which you have no control or recourse and which is completely unnecessary.

This is fear mongering away your privacy without purpose. You're fixing something that isn't broken. The same reason we don't need fingerprint checks because there is no evidence they make anyone safer.


----------



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> This is EXACTLY how they get you to surrender your rights. If you have nothing to hide, let me search you. If you have nothing to hide, let me search your car. If you have nothing to hide, let me search your house.
> 
> It has NOTHING to do with guilt. I don't do drugs. I do realise that when you surrender rights, you never get them back. They are there to protect the innocent, not the guilty.
> 
> ...


This has nothing to do with privacy, this has to do with safety, I think your over-exaggerating again. I would like to know for certain that my driver isn't impaired by drugs, PERIOD. IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE.

Your trying to make a mountain out of molehill. I get tested every time I go in for a job. I have never tested positive for anything. If you do it at the hospital, then your going to get a quality test.


----------



## rob_la (May 19, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> This is EXACTLY how they get you to surrender your rights. If you have nothing to hide, let me search you. If you have nothing to hide, let me search your car. If you have nothing to hide, let me search your house.
> 
> It has NOTHING to do with guilt. I don't do drugs. I do realise that when you surrender rights, you never get them back. They are there to protect the innocent, not the guilty.
> 
> ...


I think there's a big difference between taking a drug test and allowing someone to rifle through your personal belongings. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is not a thread about privacy vs security. Save that for the Edward Snowden and Jullian Assange forums. Drug tests are commonplace in the United States for many types of jobs, especially jobs with employees performing a task where impairment could have serious consequences. The warrantless searching you describe deals with the constitution and encounters with police, but when it comes to applying for a job, there is no "right" to refuse a drug test. If you don't like it, go find a job that doesn't test and you're all good. Like Uber.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

pbracing33b said:


> So don't truck drivers who own their own trucks and they still have to be submitted to drug testing.


In CA the state DMV requires all commercial drivers be enrolled in random drug testing pool, and it isn't only once a year.

Your name is put in a lottery type system, if your name is pulled you have a couple hrs to show up and be tested. My name was once pulled three weeks in a row.


----------



## observer (Dec 11, 2014)

There are literally hundreds of complaints on Twitter about Uber drivers under the influence of drugs, marijuana and alcohol.

It's just a matter of time before someone is killed.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> This has nothing to do with privacy, this has to do with safety, I think your over-exaggerating again. I would like to know for certain that my driver isn't impaired by drugs, PERIOD. IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE.
> 
> Your trying to make a mountain out of molehill. I get tested every time I go in for a job. I have never tested positive for anything. If you do it at the hospital, then your going to get a quality test.


Yes, I understand the mentality. Surrender freedom for security, even false security. The same argument that is used against Uber despite the fact that all the hypothetical horrors of law abiding citizens driving people around would become a crime fest and 30 car pileups without special licenses, super committees of well connected cronies, fees, and fingerprint checks.

This discussion reminds me of the open container laws. We don't have one other than the driver can't have an open container. Why? Because while folks like you just handed over your rights for _perceived security_, folks like us asked: "Does it reduce drunk driving? Because before we pass a law that will harm people's finances and reputations, we want to know that how a passenger drinking gets a driver drunk"

The answer is no. Now, go try and get it repealed!  Go try and get it back after you gave it away without any reason!

Once surrendered, you won't get it back. The government will take away anything you allow them. So will corporations. My god man, don't hand them away.

You have never had a false positive so...what? They DO happen. It COULD happen to you. And after you blew all that money and effort to kick out some weekend pot smokers and false positives, what did you accomplish? Nothing. By the way, the real druggies can beat any test except DNA so the people you are punishing are harmless.

What you don't seem to grasp is that it won't change a thing except you are now begging them to screw you over.

Corporate punk: _"We need to get rid of x number of drivers, just send them an email that they failed the drug test."
_
I will never stop being amazed that people will subject themselves to false accusations and overzealous prosecution and never even consider if it actually accomplishes the goal they intended.


----------



## rob_la (May 19, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> Yes, I understand the mentality. Surrender freedom for security, even false security.
> 
> This discussion reminds me of the open container laws. We don't have one other than the driver can't have an open container. Why? Because while folks like you just handed over your rights for _perceived security_, folks like us asked: "Does it reduce drunk driving?"
> 
> ...


I think you make some good points, but just FYI there is no such thing as a "DNA drug test" you might mean blood test?


----------



## Einstein (Oct 10, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> This has nothing to do with privacy, this has to do with safety, I think your over-exaggerating again. I would like to know for certain that my driver isn't impaired by drugs, PERIOD. IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE.
> 
> Your trying to make a mountain out of molehill. I get tested every time I go in for a job. I have never tested positive for anything. If you do it at the hospital, then your going to get a quality test.


1 - Do you think your lawyer or accountant or even your doctor should be regularly tested? After all, their work is of great value to you and you sure don't want them to be impaired on the job!

2 - Who the hell has the time to go get a test at the hospital? You must have an excessive amount of free time on your hands.

3 - Your comment about being willing to pay the fee for these tests is pretty much the dumbest comment I have come across in this forum all week.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

rob_la said:


> I think you make some good points, but just FYI there is no such thing as a "DNA drug test" you might mean blood test?


I thought I might be wrong on that. Thanks. I meant hair and fingernail testing.


----------



## novadrivergal (Oct 8, 2015)

I oppose ongoing, surprise drug testing as an invasion of privacy unrelated to the requirements of a job. If someone gets high on Saturday and comes to work sober on Monday, that should be good enough. The lag in one's system makes it impossible to tell if someone is high at the time the test is done.

I don't think prehire or once-a-year testing is a bad thing but not for the reasons you probably think.

It means the person's system has been clear of marijuana for 4-6 weeks and other drugs for 3-7 days. If you can't refrain from partaking for that long I don't want to hire you to do anything more important than shovel my driveway. And you shouldn't be driving anything, much less driving passengers. You can buy the test strips online so you know exactly when you are clear to take the test. This tests your judgement and self control, and also whether you are smart enough to understand these parameters. An idiot who rolls the dice and gets caught is too stupid to hire.

Requiring new drivers to submit a clear drug test would screen out stupid people who are always high and that's a good thing. It would also thin the driver pool by weeding out those people as well as those who are too afraid or unorganized to get the test done. If Uber contracted with a big company that has a nationwide system of labs the price would be very low and it would give them a way of showing they took precautions.

I'll sign up for a test ... next month, please.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Einstein said:


> 1 - Do you think your lawyer or accountant or even your doctor should be regularly tested? After all, their work is of great value to you and you sure don't want them to be impaired on the job!
> 
> 2 - Who the hell has the time to go get a test at the hospital? You must have an excessive amount of free time on your hands.
> 
> 3 - Your comment about being willing to pay the fee for these tests is pretty much the dumbest comment I have come across in this forum all week.


If you don't test your barber, there's going to be a heroin induced bloody mess at every barber shop! Just because they have ZERO history of any drug offenses is just too little to go on! They may even smoke a joint every once in a while! FIRE THEM FIRE THEM FIRE THEM!

Do we test crosswalk guards? Are we really entrusting our kids to crosswalk guards on crack?!

Don't forget drug testing anyone who wants to testify at a Left Coast town meeting where people think the government decides rent, pesticides, and what farmers should grow on free land with vegetable trees!






The 3 claps at the end always kills me!

Hey, you ever notice George Washington and Benjamin Franklin got high to relax in their off time and still did OK? Too bad we didn't get them fired for "Safety."


----------



## Coffeekeepsmedriving (Oct 2, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> I had a rider tell me the other day that there was a driver that tried to sell him pot before he exited the car. He also told me that he thought that he thought the guy was smoking a joint prior to him getting in the car. He told me that he reported this to uber. But do you think uber/lyft should enforce drug testing policies and if so how do you enforce it?
> 
> In my opinion I think that we should have a drug testing policy in place. In fact I would welcome it. I think it would also gain consumer confidence once they are aware of these policies in place.
> 
> ...


UBER is only an app remember!


----------



## SECOTIME (Sep 18, 2015)

That guy has balls. Everyone knows you gotta wait to be asked for pot not come right out.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

They require you have a drivers license and they don't pay for that.


----------



## Fuzzyelvis (Dec 7, 2014)

UberHammer said:


> DOT only has authority over inter-state commerce. As long as the Uber driver only works in one state, DOT can't do anything about it.


Since I technically COULD transport a rider across state lines and many in the NE do (NY and NJ are just one example of many) why would that not put them under DOT?


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

novadrivergal said:


> I oppose ongoing, surprise drug testing as an invasion of privacy unrelated to the requirements of a job. If someone gets high on Saturday and comes to work sober on Monday, that should be good enough. The lag in one's system makes it impossible to tell if someone is high at the time the test is done.
> 
> I don't think prehire or once-a-year testing is a bad thing but not for the reasons you probably think.
> 
> ...


My god people, that's a sales pitch I can buy! Weed out [no pun intended] the morons with a drug test because if they are too stupid to defeat a drug test, they are too stupid to drive!

Hey, has any pro-surrender person considered that if it's logical for an Uber Driver, it's logical for ALL drivers? What's the difference? Aren't we all on the road at high speeds [no pun intended]? Shouldn't all drivers have government enforced random drug testing? I mean, my god, I drive my children around every day at up to 70 MPH and I'm NEVER drug tested!! How is that less important than driving a drunk home?

And all professionals? And...well...everyone? Wouldn't we be safer if every person had to submit to a drug test? And a fingerprint check? And random searches of person, property, and home? Wouldn't that make us safe?

We'll need a lot of prisons.

I know, let's just put us all in prisons once a year and you have to pass all the tests to get out! Do you have any idea how safe we'd be?!?


----------



## Dhus (Jun 3, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> It kinda of shocks me that people are voting no to this, so does that mean they are doing drugs and don't want to submit to the drug testing policy? I can't seem to wrap my head around why you wouldn't want this as a driver or as a company.


No one is stopping you from taking a drug test ? your self employed , you want a drug test yourself go right ahead . What it sounds like to me is you want more regulation's and why stop at drug test's , hell why not regulate us under D.O.T. ? OR you could just get a reguler job and leave grownup stuff alone if you cant handle it .


----------



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

Dhus said:


> No one is stopping you from taking a drug test ? your self employed , you want a drug test yourself go right ahead . What it sounds like to me is you want more regulation's and why stop at drug test's , hell why not regulate us under D.O.T. ? OR you could just get a reguler job and leave grownup stuff alone if you cant handle it .


First off we are sub-contractors whether you like that or not. Secondly when I was a sub-contractor for another company I had to do a drug test before I got the job, and yes I worked my hours that they wanted me to work. So your point is moot, many many contractor have to have proof that their employees are drug tested its really no big deal, if it is really that big of a deal, then I am going to assume that you are taking something and don't want to get caught using. But my question is if you are doing that then how many others are doing that? This is about safety period, if I take an uber/lyft (which I occasionally do) then I want to know that I am safe, and that person is sober behind the wheel, I don't think its too much to ask especially if you only have to do it once. I mean you can't set 15 min out of your day to go pee in a cup? I mean if its really a hassle then I have no problem taking your fares then. Bc I think it is badly needed in our industry, I think customers would have more confidence in ridesharing as well.


----------



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

Dhus said:


> No one is stopping you from taking a drug test ? your self employed , you want a drug test yourself go right ahead . What it sounds like to me is you want more regulation's and why stop at drug test's , hell why not regulate us under D.O.T. ? OR you could just get a reguler job and leave grownup stuff alone if you cant handle it .


If I was truly self employed then I would be able to set my own rates, I would be able to change cancellation fees, I would charge more for short trips, but the fact is were not truly self-employed we are sub-contractors.


----------



## KGB7 (Apr 23, 2015)

StephenJBlue said:


> I agree. Your contribution really added to the "so much stupid".


I guess you dont value your life while you have no control of a vehicle that is being driven or flown by a drug addict.

Sounds fun.


----------



## KGB7 (Apr 23, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> "




Grow food and east coast Bush because its good.

Yeah... shes doesnt do drugs. /s


----------



## Thehulk (Jul 23, 2015)

In NYC TLC already screen drivers for drugs yearly and we have to pay for that... Anotber drug test...? I prefer not..


----------



## Yuri Lygotme (Jul 27, 2014)

Hell no, that's the only fun part of the job!


----------



## JimS (Aug 18, 2015)

novadrivergal said:


> I oppose ongoing, surprise drug testing as an invasion of privacy unrelated to the requirements of a job.


What? Unrelated to the requirements of a job? You've got to be kidding me! Here's my 2¢...

1) Submit to a prescreening test, just like you would for a background check and driving record check. Uber pays.
2) Submit to a random sampling of 10% of the workforce over a 6-month period. Uber pays.
3) Submit to a mandatory test if complaint received. Pass, Uber pays. Fail, you pay and get deactivated.

As part of the requirements to opening up San Antonio to Uber, random drug testing of 10% of the workforce is required. I say go with all three of the above.

I'm sorry, but it's not invasion of privacy to expect to be safe. The answers I've seen here continue to make me prefer to be a driver over ever wanting to be a passenger - or promoting this service to anyone in my family.

As for independent contractors, it's already been mentioned, but I'll restate it. That doesn't mean crap. Taxi drivers all over Savannah who work for Yellow Cab have "Independent Contractor" plastered over the side of their vehicles. But they can't negotiate their rates and they can't opt out of drug testing.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

Testing for the good ganja would probably weed out 85% or more of us in CO!

Opposed!


----------



## StephenJBlue (Sep 23, 2014)

KGB7 said:


> I guess you dont value your life while you have no control of a vehicle that is being driven or flown by a drug addict.
> 
> Sounds fun.


Yep. You're just being silly.


----------



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

Thehulk said:


> In NYC TLC already screen drivers for drugs yearly and we have to pay for that... Anotber drug test...? I prefer not..


No I wouldn't want to see people do it more than necessary.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> Bc I think it is badly needed in our industry, I think customers would have more confidence in ridesharing as well.


And herein lies the rub. You think it's badly needed with no evidence of such and would build confidence in a system they already have confidence in.

I hear no pax anywhere asking that we be drug tested.

You would force the expenditure of hundreds of millions and thousands of hours invading the privacy of citizens to solve a problem that doesn't exist.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> If I was truly self employed then I would be able to set my own rates, I would be able to change cancellation fees, I would charge more for short trips, but the fact is were not truly self-employed we are sub-contractors.


We aren't sub-contractors, we're contractors. Semantics.

We are, in fact, self-employed. Accepting rates from a provider is part of self-employment. You choose to accept them or not.

You CAN do all the things you suggest, just not through Uber.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> No I wouldn't want to see people do it more than necessary.


Necessary for what? What problem are you solving with this mass expenditure?


----------



## Altima ATL (Jul 13, 2015)

Lets push it further - just to make everything fair.

The DMV for all states should make a mandatory drug test for everyone (not just Uber driver) renewing their drivers license.

Because when I am out on the road I want to feel safe and know there is nobody driving 'high'

Then we would all be happy.

(.) <== Pinch of salt (take as necessary)


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Altima ATL said:


> Lets push it further - just to make everything fair.
> 
> The DMV for all states should make a mandatory drug test for everyone (not just Uber driver) renewing their drivers license.
> 
> ...


Why not random checkpoints where we all randomly pee in a cup or face jail and heavy fines?

Maybe we need a device in every car we blow into and drop a hair into before we can start our cars? Then, if you fail, the doors can lock until the proper authorities arrive to punish you for smoking a bowl on that float trip because you're a criminal.

Innocence is not a valid excuse.

Laura J. Martin, MD

"Drug tests generally produce false-positive results in 5% to 10% of cases and false negatives in 10% to 15% of cases, new research shows."

"Eating as little as a teaspoon of poppy seeds -- less than the amount on a poppy seed bagel -- can produce false-positive results on tests for opioid abuse, says Dwight Smith, MD, of the VA Medical Center in Black Hills, S.D."

"To get a better picture of the tests' flaws, Smith and colleagues at Boston Medical Center reviewed scientific articles on drug screening published between January 1980 and September 2009.

The results were presented at the American Psychiatric Association's annual meeting.

Cold medications, the antidepressant Wellbutrin, and tricyclic antidepressants can trigger false-positive results on tests foramphetamines, according to the review, and the antidepressant Zoloft and the painkiller Daypro can show up as a benzodiazepine problem."

The quinolone antibiotic drugs can trigger false positives for opioids, and the HIV medication Sustiva can show up as marijuana use, Smith says."

"Another problem is that most standard drug tests have a substantial false-negative rate for oxycodone (OxyContin, Percolone, Roxicodone) an opioid drug that's been associated with high levels of abuse. In some cases, a person could be taking oxycodone and the routine drug screen may miss it and report as negative. Oxycodone is also found in the medications Percocet, Roxicet, and Tylox.

Yet one study in the review showed that 88% of doctors didn't know that they may need to order a special test to accurately screen for oxycodone.

Other opioids missed by standard tests include methadone, fentanyl, Ultra m, Subutex, and Suboxone, Smith says.

Likewise, standard tests may miss some sedative and hypnotic drugs.

Another problem is that there are no federal guidelines setting threshold levels for positive results, Smith says.

Over the years, people have come up with all sorts of ways to try to beat the tests, mainly by diluting urine samples, he says.

"We really have no good numbers on how prevalent drug test cheating is," Smith says"


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> Corporate punk: _"We need to get rid of x number of drivers, just send them an email that they failed the drug test."
> _


I see a libel/defamation suit in the making.

FYI - Drug testing is SOP in nearly all areas of employment everywhere, it is not a violation of privacy.


----------



## frndthDuvel (Aug 31, 2014)

Einstein said:


> 1 - Do you think your lawyer or accountant or even your doctor should be regularly tested? After all, their work is of great value to you and you sure don't want them to be impaired on the job!
> 
> 2 - Who the hell has the time to go get a test at the hospital? You must have an excessive amount of free time on your hands.
> 
> 3 - Your comment about being willing to pay the fee for these tests is pretty much the dumbest comment I have come across in this forum all week.


I think politicians should be tested.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> We aren't sub-contractors, we're contractors. Semantics.


No semantics here, you are wrong. We are the very definition of sub-contractors. UBER is in fact the contractor, they get the customers, they provide the quote to the customer, they then sub-contract the work to us. PING.


----------



## UberTaxPro (Oct 3, 2014)

Einstein said:


> How much do you want to bet that if Uber enforced mandatory drug testing, they would require you, the Driver, to pay for these tests?


Allmost all of ubers income comes from drivers efforts so ultimatley we pay everything anyway. no thanks I don't want to bet!


----------



## Guest (Oct 28, 2015)

I see nothing wrong with having a drug policy in place, I would want to know that I am safe and have other safe drivers with me on the road, Lord knows their are already too many idiots out there. Lets take the ones who abuse this off the road. Just my 2 cents


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

This thread is hilarious! I am not an idiot. I promise you that I am very intelligent and just because I smoke pot doesn't mean that I shouldn't be able to drive a car and earn money off of it. When you smoke pot it stays in your bloodstream for up to 30 days. The high lasts anywhere from 30 minutes to a few hours depending on strain and how often the user smokes. When I say that I smoke pot you can believe me 100% that I have never driven the Uber platform while stoned. I oppose this concept because I don't need somebody telling me as a contractor that I am not allowed to smoke pot in my free time.

Those of you who feel unsafe sound ridiculous and paranoid.


----------



## Guest (Oct 28, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> This thread is hilarious! I am not an idiot. I promise you that I am very intelligent and just because I smoke pot doesn't mean that I shouldn't be able to drive a car and earn money off of it. When you smoke pot it stays in your bloodstream for up to 30 days. The high lasts anywhere from 30 minutes to a few hours depending on strain and how often the user smokes. When I say that I smoke pot you can believe me 100% that I have never driven the Uber platform while stoned. I oppose this concept because I don't need somebody telling me as a contractor that I am not allowed to smoke pot in my free time.
> 
> Those of you who feel unsafe sound ridiculous and paranoid.


Yeah you may responsible, but what about those who aren't? Aren't you a least bit concerned if a driver is driving impaired or not? I'm sorry, I've met toooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many irresponsible people in my life and I don't trust people in doing the right thing, bc most of the time they won't. So why not have drug test to prove you are safe to drive a car. It is common place to have this done in driving ANYTHING.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> I oppose this concept because I don't need somebody telling me as a contractor that I am not allowed to smoke pot in my free time.


I'm not questioning your intelligence, however, this statement is false. You oppose this concept because you understand the implications.


----------



## KGB7 (Apr 23, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> This thread is hilarious! I am not an idiot. I promise you that I am very intelligent and just because I smoke pot doesn't mean that I shouldn't be able to drive a car and earn money off of it. When you smoke pot it stays in your bloodstream for up to 30 days. The high lasts anywhere from 30 minutes to a few hours depending on strain and how often the user smokes. When I say that I smoke pot you can believe me 100% that I have never driven the Uber platform while stoned. I oppose this concept because I don't need somebody telling me as a contractor that I am not allowed to smoke pot in my free time.
> 
> Those of you who feel unsafe sound ridiculous and paranoid.


Intelligence and pretty words have nothing to with hand and eye coordination.

I'll bet you a $1,000 I'm a better driver because I don't smoke pot.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> I'm not questioning your intelligence, however, this statement is false. You oppose this concept because you understand the implications.


It looks like you're calling me a liar. The reason I oppose drug testing is exactly what I said. I don't need somebody telling me what I can do in my free time.


----------



## volksie (Apr 8, 2015)

WHO'S GOING TO DRIVE THOSE D.E.A AUCTION CARS THAT PASS UBER INSPECTIONS ?


----------



## nighthawk398 (Jul 21, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> I had a rider tell me the other day that there was a driver that tried to sell him pot before he exited the car. He also told me that he thought that he thought the guy was smoking a joint prior to him getting in the car. He told me that he reported this to uber. But do you think uber/lyft should enforce drug testing policies and if so how do you enforce it?
> 
> In my opinion I think that we should have a drug testing policy in place. In fact I would welcome it. I think it would also gain consumer confidence once they are aware of these policies in place.
> 
> ...


You wouldn't have this illegal selling in states like Colorado and Washington where its legal, why test something that possibly be legal in all states eventually


----------



## PhoenicianBlind (Aug 31, 2015)

They'd best ensure drivers are on drugs to keep driving and not wise up to the rates rapes


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

Daisy S. said:


> Yeah you may responsible, but what about those who aren't? Aren't you a least bit concerned if a driver is driving impaired or not? I'm sorry, I've met toooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo many irresponsible people in my life and I don't trust people in doing the right thing, bc most of the time they won't. So why not have drug test to prove you are safe to drive a car. It is common place to have this done in driving ANYTHING.


Reread my original post. Then you will see what I am saying. It has nothing to do with being safe and everything to do with what I do in my free time. Here in Colorado we voted to legalize marijuana and things have gone really well since then. We are still trying to figure out how to monitor the streets because there is no reliable way to test somebody to see if they are high or not. Everybody knows that marijuana stays in your bloodstream for weeks after you take a single joint so how do you propose to accurately test that?

Do you folks really believe that because a guy smokes a joint on the weekend and then wakes up Monday and drives people around that you were less safe?


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

nighthawk398 said:


> You wouldn't have this illegal selling in states like Colorado and Washington where its legal, why test something that possibly be legal in all states eventually


It will be legal. We made so much money on it last year that the government has to refund us some of the budget.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

KGB7 said:


> I am better and I bet you $1,000.


All right you are on! let's come up with some sort of way to rate each other's driving, we can get some judges and come on out to Colorado. We can start with mountain driving and then move to highway driving before testing our skills in Denver. After we're finished I'll take you to my favorite op and show you how to smoke pot. I doubt you'll ever go back to DC after that.

This is a great thread for bulking up that ignore list but I like most of your posts. Usually good for a laugh or two.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> It looks like you're calling me a liar. The reason I oppose drug testing is exactly what I said. I don't need somebody telling me what I can do in my free time.


Look, I don't know you and honestly I fully support your right to do whatever you want "legally" on your spare time. But, if you think I'm calling you a liar it's only because I believe you are lying to yourself. If it helps I'll explain my position on this exercise. A. I don't care if they impose a random drug check policy, they impose their dime. I don't care. B. This will never happen, ever. Unless we are classified as employees, then the rules change. But still highly unlikely because it's still their dime. I work for a company that has a zero tolerance random drug testing policy, you know what, they've never utilized it unless they had reasonable cause to believe that someone was under the influence. Oh, and by the way, most states require companies to "rehab" people on their dime if they inform the company the have a problem and need help.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

nighthawk398 said:


> You wouldn't have this illegal selling in states like Colorado and Washington where its legal, why test something that possibly be legal in all states eventually


I'm not sure what the legalities are in Colorado and Washington but I presume that selling out of your car is still illegal. And, even though it is legal doesn't make driving while under the influence legal, nor does it imply that employers or contractors have to accept folks showing up to work under the influence.


----------



## nickd8775 (Jul 12, 2015)

I support drug testing except for weed


----------



## Uberselectguy (Oct 16, 2015)

RomanRon said:


> Urine testing cost approx $30 dollars x 160,000 approx drivers= $4.8 mil last I heard valuation of company 70 bil although this is on paper I don't think it would be a problem and why would they have to go world wide with this? that being said I don't see this happening ....until some idiot drivers kills someone and they find drugs in system post mortem


Don't worry, Uber will never cut into its bottom line with drug testing. They could care less if you used dope, crack, ect. Besides, the biggest dope is Travis himself. It would be a contradiction for a dope to fire dopers.


----------



## Guest (Oct 28, 2015)

Uberselectguy said:


> Don't worry, Uber will never cut into its bottom line with drug testing. They could care less if you used dope, crack, ect. Besides, the biggest dope is Travis himself. It would be a contradiction for a dope to fire dopers.


I think eventually the gov will step in and prob mandate that we all be drug tested, it has happened in many other industries, I wouldn't be surprised if the gov stepped in here too.


----------



## Einstein (Oct 10, 2015)

Daisy S. said:


> .... and nothing is going to change my MIND about it, it is IRRESPONSIBLE and you don't care about ANYONE except YOURSELF and WHAT YOU DO IN YOUR PRECIOUS FREE TIME.


What Kraus does in his free time is nobody's business but Kraus'.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

KGB7 said:


> I'm not racing on public roads, that's what race tracks are for.
> 
> I like your posts as well, but your intelligence just committed suicide.


Oh come on man! I didn't say racing and I'm trying to have a little bit of light fun with you. Want to meet in the middle instead? Say Kansas City?


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> I'm not sure what the legalities are in Colorado and Washington but I presume that selling out of your car is still illegal. And, even though it is legal doesn't make driving while under the influence legal, nor does it imply that employers or contractors have to accept folks showing up to work under the influence.


Well I don't think that anybody is advocating selling drugs out of the car or driving under the influence. Are you reading these posts?


----------



## Einstein (Oct 10, 2015)

Daisy S. said:


> ....we need drug testing to get those off the road who are irresponsible and don't really care about anyone else EXCEPT themselves and what they DO in their free time.


This is a non-issue for the most part. Any driver who gets a complaint about being impaired behind the wheel will be swiftly fired.

The real problem on the roads, by a wide, wide margin, is alcohol, not 'drugs'. So using your logic, every driver should be tested for alcohol before they begin their shift.
And while we're at it, let's just say that anybody who drinks alcohol in their free time is irresponsible and selfish, and should not drive for a living. Or drive period!


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> Well I don't think that anybody is advocating selling drugs out of the car or driving under the influence. Are you reading these posts?


I am. Nighthawk398 directly quoted the OP's original post which specifically referenced selling out of a car. Are you reading these posts ?


----------



## KGB7 (Apr 23, 2015)

Einstein said:


> This is a non-issue for the most part. Any driver who gets a complaint about being impaired behind the wheel will be swiftly fired.
> 
> The real problem on the roads, by a wide, wide margin, is alcohol, not 'drugs'. So using your logic, every driver should be tested for alcohol before they begin their shift.
> And while we're at it, let's just say that anybody who drinks alcohol in their free time is irresponsible and selfish, and should not drive for a living. Or drive period!


The two have different long term side effects when used on regular basis.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> Well I don't think that anybody is advocating selling drugs out of the car or driving under the influence. Are you reading these posts?


Lets redirect a bit. I've already stipulated that I don't care what you do on your spare time, I don't. I drink on mine, no difference really. I am also an advocate of legalizing marijuana, I think it would solve a tremendous amount of budget issues and I believe the positives of legalizing out way the negatives by a long shot. The medical alone is worth it. I don't smoke BTW.

Would you be a proponent of a random drug testing system that was done while you are on the clock, something intuitive that could address the issues with how long it is in your system and compensates you while you are being tested ?


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> Lets redirect a bit. I've already stipulated that I don't care what you do on your spare time, I don't. I drink on mine, no difference really. I am also an advocate of legalizing marijuana, I think it would solve a tremendous amount of budget issues and I believe the positives of legalizing out way the negatives by a long shot. The medical alone is worth it. I don't smoke BTW.
> 
> Would you be a proponent of a random drug testing system that was done while you are on the clock, something intuitive that could address the issues with how long it is in your system and compensates you while you are being tested ?


If marijuana didn't stay in your bloodstream for up to 30 days or more than yes I would be. Colorado is trying to figure out how to do this right now. How do we keep stone to drivers off the road. It is a problem but there is no solution for it because of the facts.


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> Colorado is trying to figure out how to do this right now.


If Colorado doesn't, someone will



Uber Kraus said:


> How do we keep stone to drivers off the road.


I have no clue what you are saying here. Smoking ?



Uber Kraus said:


> It is a problem but there is no solution for it because of the facts.


Again I'm not sure exactly what you are saying, what facts are you alluding to, still smoking? As a rule facts tend to lead to solutions. If you are saying that there is no real way to keep abusers off of the road then you are right, I agree.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> If Colorado doesn't, someone will
> 
> I have no clue what you are saying here. Smoking ?
> 
> Again I'm not sure exactly what you are saying, what facts are you alluding to, still smoking? As a rule facts tend to lead to solutions. If you are saying that there is no real way to keep abusers off of the road then you are right, I agree.


 Sorry, I am not being very clear. Doing a bit of multitasking&#8230; What I am saying is quite simply that there is no way to accurately test if somebody is stoned. This is because marijuana stays in your bloodstream for up to 30 days after you smoke.


----------



## pbracing33b (May 18, 2015)

Daisy S. said:


> I think eventually the gov will step in and prob mandate that we all be drug tested, it has happened in many other industries, I wouldn't be surprised if the gov stepped in here too.


I couldn't agree more daisy, It prob will take someone getting killed and the general public finding out about no drug testing the. The gov will prob step inand prob mandate I can only guess what will happen when someone get killed bc of some druggies habit.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> Oh, and by the way, most states require companies to "rehab" people on their dime if they inform the company the have a problem and need help.


Let me guess, by "most states" you mean CA or NY?


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Daisy S. said:


> I think eventually the gov will step in and prob mandate that we all be drug tested, it has happened in many other industries, I wouldn't be surprised if the gov stepped in here too.


Um, by the Government are you saying the Federal Government? Which industries do they mandate drug testing?


----------



## Davesway10 (Aug 7, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> Let me guess, by "most states" you mean CA or NY?


If they are part of the equation that equals most, then yeah them too. Not sure what you are getting at. I'm talking about states that have comprehensive laws that require employers to rehabilitate employees that come to them with addiction problems. These are good laws, what are you talking about? By most I mean a number greater than 25, I have no data to back this up though.


----------



## frndthDuvel (Aug 31, 2014)

Daisy S. said:


> I see nothing wrong with having a drug policy in place, I would want to know that I am safe and have other safe drivers with me on the road, Lord knows their are already too many idiots out there. Lets take the ones who abuse this off the road. Just my 2 cents


I just look at it as a lottery ticket for my heirs should I be killed in an airplane crash or an UBER. 
I'd rather ride with somebody who is risk at failure of a drug test because they went skiing in Colorado 27 days ago then the dude who gave up meth for 7 days or less after a month binge. Or a somebody with a hangover. YMMV Is drug testing going to cure that?


----------



## Steve Joseph (Oct 21, 2015)

pbracing33b said:


> It kinda of shocks me that people are voting no to this, so does that mean they are doing drugs and don't want to submit to the drug testing policy? I can't seem to wrap my head around why you wouldn't want this as a driver or as a company.


Given UBER's history do we really believe the drivers wouldn't have to pay for this since they're not employees but contractors? What about a driver with cancer or recovering from chemo who only smokes medical marijuana when he's not ubering? What about the other medical conditions like Glaucoma? Again, used when not ubering? Is steroids on the list of substances found in this drug policy? Is the driver getting hormone or steroid treatment? Maybe these are but a few reasons someone would vote no for this? They can be a responsible adult and taking a substance that is doctor prescribed and do not drive when on their medication but since it will be in their system does your drug policy or UBER's past behavior consider or indicate that a driver can disclose this information and not run the risk of being deactivated for failing the drug test?

I didn't vote yes or no and won't decide anything until I see the proper scope of this proposed drug policy.

*"I think it would also gain consumer confidence once they are aware of these policies in place."* - UBER has a consumer confidence issue? That's news to me. Last I checked almost all my passengers think UBER is the best thing since slice bread and their partners(indentured slaves) are making bank and being their own boss by working when they want. You and I know better.

All of this being said, if anyone is driving around passengers inhibited by any drug or substance that impairs their senses they're absolutely irresponsible and a danger to the passengers, themselves, pedestrians and any moving vehicle or object that's on the road.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Daisy S. said:


> Look lets just call it what it is, you want to smoke pot and you want to do what you want to do without any consequences, bc you want to live the carefree life. Well life DOES have Consequences and maybe you should MAN up and be RESPONSIBLE.
> 
> Secondly if you don't like it you can ALWAYS find another job, no one is FORCING you to drive for uber.
> 
> This is why we need drug testing to get those off the road who are irresponsible and don't really care about anyone else EXCEPT themselves and what they DO in their free time.


Why is it that any perceived threat leads people to throw their rights away?

Is there an issue with Uber drivers driving on drugs? An epidemic? A study? Or is this just a fabricated issue?


----------



## Einstein (Oct 10, 2015)

frndthDuvel said:


> I just look at it as a lottery ticket for my heirs should I be killed in an airplane crash or an UBER.


So what are the accident and death rates for uber, lyft and the taxi industry?

Are we talking about something statistically meaningful?


----------



## Steve Joseph (Oct 21, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> Why is it that any perceived threat leads people to throw their rights away?
> 
> Id there an issue with Uber drivers driving on drugs? An epidemic? A study? Or is this just a fabricated issue?


There is not a single person here with any shred of evidence this is an epidemic. Even if they cited 1-100 cases involving an impaired UBER driver and drug use it would be considerably disproportionate to the amount of UBER drivers who do not use substances while ubering thus it can not be defined as an epidemic.


----------



## iDriveNashville (Apr 10, 2015)

Okay, jumping into this thing 6 pages deep without reading all the replies, which is dangerous, but here goes: pre-employment drug screens are a scam. Most of the drugs that generate the most concern flush out within 72 hours. 

I do support for cause drug screenings, which would be with reasonable suspicion or workplace accident. In a drivers case, that's going to be an accident or traffic stop, and guess what? The cops are going to do that on the tax payers dime already. 

This means there is absolutely zero incentive for uber to spend millions on worthless pre-employment drug screens, so it won't happen unless TLCs require it, and where they have had the opportunity, they haven't. 

In summary, no, I don't think they're worthwhile, and if they come into being, it'll be the drivers paying. No all around.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Davesway10 said:


> If they are part of the equation that equals most, then yeah them too. Not sure what you are getting at. I'm talking about states that have comprehensive laws that require employers to rehabilitate employees that come to them with addiction problems. These are good laws, what are you talking about? By most I mean a number greater than 25, I have no data to back this up though.


It's just that left coasters and north easterners tend to think all states are as oppressive and intrusive as theirs. I doubt very much that most states mandate my drug habit becomes my employers problem.


----------



## Guest (Oct 29, 2015)

Steve Joseph said:


> Given UBER's history do we really believe the drivers wouldn't have to pay for this since they're not employees but contractors? What about a driver with cancer or recovering from chemo who only smokes medical marijuana when he's not ubering? What about the other medical conditions like Glaucoma? Again, used when not ubering? Is steroids on the list of substances found in this drug policy? Is the driver getting hormone or steroid treatment? Maybe these are but a few reasons someone would vote no for this? They can be a responsible adult and taking a substance that is doctor prescribed and do not drive when on their medication but since it will be in their system does your drug policy or UBER's past behavior consider or indicate that a driver can disclose this information and not run the risk of being deactivated for failing the drug test?
> 
> I didn't vote yes or no and won't decide anything until I see the proper scope of this proposed drug policy.
> 
> ...


 lol I've NEVER met ANY responsible person that DOES DRUGS, NOT ONCE EVER. They are never to work on time, they never get their work done on time, their ALWAYS looking to get their next fix and yet you want me to believe that DRUGGIES are responsible. Yea tell me again how we don't need testing that's ok tell me that when someone dies in your family taking an uber. Oh wait DRUGGIES don't care about anyone in their family, their ONLY concerned with themselves and don't really care about ANYONE ELSE EXCEPT THEMSELVES.


----------



## Guest (Oct 29, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> Why is it that any perceived threat leads people to throw their rights away?
> 
> Is there an issue with Uber drivers driving on drugs? An epidemic? A study? Or is this just a fabricated issue?


Why can't you wrap your head around this, your rights are already gone, the gov is can FIND OUT anything about you already. But you want to live in the stoneage and think that your rights are being invaded when it has nothing to do with your rights dumb but. It has to do with safety and all of the other transportation industries ALREADY have something in place. If you don't like it then QUIT doing drugs.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Daisy S. said:


> Why can't you wrap your head around this, your rights are already gone, the gov is can FIND OUT anything about you already. But you want to live in the stoneage and think that your rights are being invaded when it has nothing to do with your rights dumb but. It has to do with safety and all of the other transportation industries ALREADY have something in place. If you don't like it then QUIT doing drugs.


Ahhhh, now I understand. The government already invades my privacy so I should just sanction it now to end a non-existent problem and I'm a non-drug using drug addict because I don't treat my rights like toilet paper.

I shouldn't have the right to privacy or to my own body?

"People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both." *Ben Franklin*

And here I was thinking you made no sense.

By the way, when calling a person a dumb butt, it has more impact if you don't misspell it.


----------



## iDriveNashville (Apr 10, 2015)

Daisy S. said:


> Go back to the hole you came out of! lol I've NEVER met ANY responsible person that DOES DRUGS, NOT ONCE EVER.


I 100% guarantee you are wrong. I've arrested doctors, lawyers, judges, and tradesmen for drugs. LOADS of professionals use drugs recreationally. There's even saying, "Ride the rails Friday and you'll piss clean on Monday!"



> They are never to work on time, they never get their work done on time, their ALWAYS looking to get their next fix and yet you want me to believe that DRUGGIES are responsible. Yea tell me again how we don't need testing that's ok tell me that when someone dies in your family taking an uber. Oh wait DRUGGIES don't care about anyone in their family, their ONLY concerned with themselves and don't really care about ANYONE ELSE EXCEPT THEMSELVES.


Oh, my bad, I thought this was serious, I didn't realize it was sarcasm, my bad.


----------



## KGB7 (Apr 23, 2015)

Uber Kraus said:


> Sorry, I am not being very clear. Doing a bit of multitasking&#8230; What I am saying is quite simply that there is no way to accurately test if somebody is stoned. This is because marijuana stays in your bloodstream for up to 30 days after you smoke.


Obvious smell red eyes, too much talking or laughing, back seat full of munchies.

I guarantee a stoned person won't pass a sobriety field test, where you have to touch your nose and walk in the straight line.


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Daisy S. said:


> Go back to the hole you came out of! lol I've NEVER met ANY responsible person that DOES DRUGS, NOT ONCE EVER. They are never to work on time, they never get their work done on time, their ALWAYS looking to get their next fix and yet you want me to believe that DRUGGIES are responsible. Yea tell me again how we don't need testing that's ok tell me that when someone dies in your family taking an uber. Oh wait DRUGGIES don't care about anyone in their family, their ONLY concerned with themselves and don't really care about ANYONE ELSE EXCEPT THEMSELVES.


False. You have met many many responsible people who do drugs on occasion. You didn't know it because they were responsible and didn't match your preconceived notions.

You would probably have to fire 90% of the US University professors if you drug screened them.

By the way, Marijuana was in use across the united states, used by leaders and politicians alike, like George Washington, Tomas Jefferson, James Madison and JFK for hundreds of years. There were no issues. It was only stigmatised as "reefer madness" and outlawed as a way to discriminate against black people. You sound just like those people.






"There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are *******, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with *******, entertainers and any others."

"Reefer makes ******* think they're as good as white men."

Harry Anslinger, commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, a predecessor to the Drug Enforcement Administration


----------



## StephenJBlue (Sep 23, 2014)

Daisy S. said:


> Look lets just call it what it is, you want to smoke pot and you want to do what you want to do without any consequences, bc you want to live the carefree life. Well life DOES have Consequences and maybe you should MAN up and be RESPONSIBLE.
> 
> Secondly if you don't like it you can ALWAYS find another job, no one is FORCING you to drive for uber.
> 
> This is why we need drug testing to get those off the road who are irresponsible and don't really care about anyone else EXCEPT themselves and what they DO in their free time.


LOL. get over yourself. If I smoke pot on Wednesday, why should I be penalized if I drive on Saturday? It doesn't mean I'm driving stoned. Your argument is specious at best.


----------



## Einstein (Oct 10, 2015)

RamzFanz said:


> "There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are *******, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with *******, entertainers and any others."


Holy crap! It's more dangerous than I thought!


----------



## RamzFanz (Jan 31, 2015)

Einstein said:


> Holy crap! It's more dangerous than I thought!


Straight to violent madness and insanity.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

KGB7 said:


> Obvious smell red eyes, too much talking or laughing, back seat full of munchies.
> 
> I guarantee a stoned person won't pass a sobriety field test, where you have to touch your nose and walk in the straight line.


Again! Wrong.

I downhill mountain bike stoned all the time and that requires more reflex than most driving scenarios. I'm talking fast, big hits, air, all of it. I think touching my nose and walking in a straight line would be fairly easy. hang on... I'll go try it.

........ Succes!!!

St. Louis? Little closer to you. You can't back out of a 1k bet that easy. Loser pays expenses. Eh? Eh?


----------



## SanPedroLover (Oct 26, 2015)

iDriveNashville said:


> pre-employment drug screens are a scam. Most of the drugs that generate the most concern flush out within 72 hours.


Truth.

Some of them flush before 72 hours. They are mostly just testing for Cannabis users, which is nonsense.

You could be a raging alcoholic cokehead smack junkie and if you can pull yourself together for a few days without using you'd pass a urine drug screen and get hired.

Total BS.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

SanPedroLover said:


> Truth.
> 
> Some of them flush before 72 hours. They are mostly just testing for Cannabis users, which is nonsense.
> 
> ...


Sums it up. That should just about end this discussion.

Who wants to judge the driving competition?


----------



## Optimus Uber (Oct 7, 2014)

Random drug testing srf pays for it.

They should test on Monday mornings as most smoke out for the weekend. Let's thin the herd


----------



## iDriveNashville (Apr 10, 2015)

SanPedroLover said:


> Truth.
> 
> Some of them flush before 72 hours. They are mostly just testing for Cannabis users, which is nonsense.
> 
> ...


Exactly. Pre-employment drug screens catch those least likely to have an actual on the job problems. I re-iterate, pre-employment screens are complete bullshit.

And if something happens, the cops are going to take care of testing. I had DUID convictions for OTC and prescribed medications left and right. Anyone DUI is going to get eaten alive, without uber doing anything. Bonus, uber gets to cut ties for violation of partner agreement.

Uber wins every which way.


----------



## iDriveNashville (Apr 10, 2015)

Optimus Uber said:


> Random drug testing srf pays for it.


Nope, it'll be part of the new Partner sign on, and drivers will pay the useless test fee.


----------



## Guest (Oct 29, 2015)

iDriveNashville said:


> I 100% guarantee you are wrong. I've arrested doctors, lawyers, judges, and tradesmen for drugs. LOADS of professionals use drugs recreationally. There's even saying, "Ride the rails Friday and you'll piss clean on Monday!"
> 
> Oh, my bad, I thought this was serious, I didn't realize it was sarcasm, my bad.


who says professionals are responsible? Have you ever hung around any of them I have, and their not all that responsible as you may think.


----------



## Guest (Oct 29, 2015)

iDriveNashville said:


> Okay, jumping into this thing 6 pages deep without reading all the replies, which is dangerous, but here goes: pre-employment drug screens are a scam. Most of the drugs that generate the most concern flush out within 72 hours.
> 
> I do support for cause drug screenings, which would be with reasonable suspicion or workplace accident. In a drivers case, that's going to be an accident or traffic stop, and guess what? The cops are going to do that on the tax payers dime already.
> 
> ...


Um if they do a hair sample you ain't passing that test if you have done drugs in the last 6 months. Quite frankly it depends on the drugs on what you are taking to determine how fast a drug can get out of your system. It just isn't 72 hours, trust me I have friends (who are nurses) and they say some drugs can stay in your system for months and you can piss dirty too.


----------



## Uber Kraus (Jun 10, 2015)

SanPedroLover said:


> Mad? lol...not mad at all...just find your posts funny and pathetically judgmental and close-minded. . Fake stuff on my profile? Such as what? That I'm a citizen of Planet Earth? Well if you are a human being or animal or insect or sea life or plant life then you are indeed a citizen of Plant Earth. Welcome to Reality, "Daisy S".
> 
> No, not yet. Just got approved for Uber beginning of this week and hopefully will be onboarded with Lyft after my weekend Mentor Session.
> 
> ...


Homie.....

Steve Jobs doesn't need to be responsible or show up on time or care about his family. He invented the iPhone!

Plus, you can take LSD and pass a drug test while you are high as shit!


----------



## Guest (Oct 29, 2015)

iDriveNashville said:


> Yeah, those drugs are cannabis, the last concern for anyone arguing damage. Everything else you can pay on Friday on piss clean on Monday.
> 
> You don't know what the f*ck you are talking about, and need to stop lining on something you clearly haven't researched since 5th grade DARE, which, by the way had been canceled, since it did more harm than good by introducing impressionable preteens to a way to rebel they'd never heard of before.
> 
> ...


If your a cop then you SHOULD know that not ALL DRUGS get out of your system within 3 days ALSO it DEPENDS on the dosage WHICH YOU SHOULD KNOW if YOUR COP.
newhealthguide org/How-Long-Do-Drugs-Stay-In-Your-System html

ohsinc com/info/detection-time-frame/

drugs ie/drugs_info/about_drugs/how_long_do_drugs_stay_in_your_system/

fda gov/Drugs/default htm

DO you want me to list more, or better yet let me talk to some of my girlfriends who work in the ER and ask them. Especially since they work with DRUGGIES every single day.


----------

