| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Drug tests and background checks? Thread poster: Hildegard Klein-Bodenheimer (X)
|
|---|
Krzysztof Kajetanowicz (X) 
Poland
Local time: 15:51
English to Polish
+ ...
| really stupid | Feb 4, 2010 |
Corporations can be dumb. Believe me, nobody at that client really thinks this makes any sense. But it was put forward for some corporate political reason and I suppose nobody in the company openly questioned the policy proposal - after all, any objection would mean that the person deems OK to work with socially inept junkies!
| | | | Nicole Schnell
United States
Local time: 06:51
English to German
+ ...
In memoriam | First you have to try all those (their?) drugs. Then they will test you. | Feb 4, 2010 |
Samuel Murray wrote:
Wow, free drug tests! Do you get the results of your tests back, or does it go straight to the client and you don't see it? And I really like that free background check too -- these guys are usually good at digging out the weirdest of stuff. Perhaps they can help find some long lost school friends of yours, or family you didn't know you had. I'm assuming you get to see the background check report.
But if not, then I'd say "no".
They will make you feel real goooooooood.
Cough, cough. My apologies, Hildegard. But this topic just blows my mind.
| | | | | Agree with rosafoyle | Feb 4, 2010 |
rosafoyle wrote:
Yes, welcome to the land of big brother...... So much for the USA being the land of the free. As an American I can tell you this policy is actually quite common in the US, if you want to be hired as an employee at privately owned corporations (not just for US gov. jobs). If I were you, I would decide how much I want to continue to work for this company. This is an infringement on your personal civil rights. There have been a number of challenges to this requirement in legal circles. I am not being silly when I say I would consider consulting a lawyer with expertise in employment law if you dont want to just cave in and give them a look into your personal life. In my opinion this is a matter of principle, since you are a free-lancer and not an employee.
This is how it is, nowadays, with some organizations in the US. So much for the land of the free, but it is there for us to take it or leave it... or take it to court, if we feel really strong about individual rights.
To be noted is that in this case they are not asking for a polygraph test (yet), so they are probably not the hardcore type
If the company happens to do work for the CIA, the Pentagon or the DoD, these requirements, as outrageous as they may seem, should not come as a surprise. However, we still have the choice to decide if we go along with them or look for clients elsewhere.
[Edited at 2010-02-04 11:24 GMT]
| | | | Jaroslaw Michalak
Poland
Local time: 15:51
Member (2004)
English to Polish
SITE LOCALIZER
I think that drug tests are of no use... There is no hard evidence that all those substances actually improve your language skills, even if anectodal evidence (Coleridge, Burroughs, Kerouac etc.) says otherwise.
Same goes with background checks. Past criminal activity might enhance your vocabulary and make your language more colorful, but it is not a given. For example, you cannot count on that embezzlement will make your writing actually better...
| | |
|
|
|
| Ah, yes, the "land of the free" | Feb 4, 2010 |
I'm with Rosafoyle on this..another of the reasons I decided that I'd rather live somewhere other than the US.
Unless, of course, you demand the same from your client; drug and background checks on all of their employees and a report on the same delivered to you.
At that point, you could decide if the results are those of a company you'd accept as a client.
| | | | Nicole Schnell
United States
Local time: 06:51
English to German
+ ...
In memoriam | Hold a second | Feb 4, 2010 |
Elizabeth Joy Pitt de Morales wrote:
I'm with Rosafoyle on this..another of the reasons I decided that I'd rather live somewhere other than the US.
Before any major US-bashing is about to start: What exactly makes you think that this is a common practice? Factory workers who are supposed to handle heavy machinery are being tested. What's wrong with that? People's lives depend on their proper handling of the machines. This has nothing to do with Big Brother and such.
However, the mere thought of applying the very same procedure to a provider of an up-scale academic service such as professional translation... grrrrmmmppffhehehe... that's too much.
| | | | Hildegard Klein-Bodenheimer (X)
Germany
Local time: 15:51
English to German
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Rather serious | Feb 4, 2010 |
Krzysztof Kajetanowicz wrote:
... I suppose nobody in the company openly questioned the policy proposal - after all, any objection would mean that the person deems OK to work with socially inept junkies!
Good morning everyone,
I am glad that you all had a good time.
But the matter is not soooo funny. I find it rather serious.
Krzysztof, you exactly hit the point. Objecting to this kind of request immediately raises suspicion along the lines, why not if they don't have anything to hide? That is the point. It is not about their right to ask for this it is about our right to say no without becoming suspected of having something to hide. It is like asking people to cut their lawns with nail clippers. Why not if they want to work for us?
| | | | Laurent KRAULAND (X)
France
Local time: 15:51
French to German
+ ...
| This I would call... | Feb 4, 2010 |
Hildegard Klein-Bodenheimer wrote:
It is like asking people to cut their lawns with nail clippers. Why not if they want to work for us?
hollow thinking, if I am allowed to say.
| | |
|
|
|
I think this is a ridiculous request.
I also think that reasoning along the lines of "you should have nothing to worry about, if you have done nothing wrong" is appalling and one of the shortest paths to absolutism. (I really have to constrain myself from flying off the handle, when I hear it.)
| | | | Laurent KRAULAND (X)
France
Local time: 15:51
French to German
+ ...
Derek Gill Franßen wrote:
I also think that reasoning along the lines of "you should have nothing to worry about, if you have done nothing wrong" is appalling and one of the shortest paths to absolutism. (I really have to constrain myself from flying off the handle, when I hear it.)
"If you do not want the world to know it (1), just do not do it" - I will refrain from naming the author of this sentence, as this would only be advertisement for them.
(1) My comment: because of the Internet search engine(s)...
[Edited at 2010-02-04 14:23 GMT]
| | | | Sanmar
United Kingdom
Local time: 14:51
Dutch to English
| with jabberwock | Feb 4, 2010 |
"I think that drug tests are of no use... There is no hard evidence that all those substances actually improve your language skills, even if anectodal evidence (Coleridge, Burroughs, Kerouac etc.) says otherwise".
LOL!!
[Edited at 2010-02-04 14:32 GMT]
| | | | | Nice one Jabberwock | Feb 4, 2010 |
That was the funniest thing I've read in ages.
| | |
|
|
|
Amy Duncan (X)
Brazil
Local time: 11:51
Portuguese to English
+ ...
| Just say "NO" | Feb 4, 2010 |
I'd never even consider working for a company that made such a request. Period.
| | | | | Not just a matter of suspicion | Feb 4, 2010 |
They expect from every translation vendor and their employees stricter than usual confidentiality requirements, drug testing (8 panels) and background checks if they want to continue working for that client.
First of all, technically speaking, you are a *subcontractor*. The agency is the vendor and if they want to please their end client like a good dog fetching for the master, they can require that their employees jump through whatever hoops they want.
You should ask to see the demand/directive/communication from the end client In Writing, including the reason and legal justification for their demands. Point out to your agency that since you DO NOT WORK directly for the client, there is every possibility that none of the client's so-called demands might ever legally apply to you.
Then there are the practical issues: Who is going to pay for all these tests and checks? Will they come to your office? Will they demand that you travel to a certain "certified" testing site? Will you be compensated for your time, expense, and lost work? What if you're not even in a state/region/country where such a site is available?
There are a lot of valid, legal reasons to decline to be tested in such a way, and none of them have anything to do with the suspicion of a potential "positive" test result. You need to let the agency know this in no uncertain terms.
| | | | Kevin Fulton
United States
Local time: 09:51
German to English
| Unwarranted invasion of privacy | Feb 4, 2010 |
As Nicole pointed out, there are good reasons to require drug testing of people working on-site, for the sake of safety, if no other reason. This can reasonably be applied to **on-site** contract workers as well as employees. Background checks of individuals working with sensitive information or financial instruments are likewise reasonable -- if on-site. It's also not unreasonable to require a background check of translators working in the area of defense or national security.
How... See more As Nicole pointed out, there are good reasons to require drug testing of people working on-site, for the sake of safety, if no other reason. This can reasonably be applied to **on-site** contract workers as well as employees. Background checks of individuals working with sensitive information or financial instruments are likewise reasonable -- if on-site. It's also not unreasonable to require a background check of translators working in the area of defense or national security.
However, as a remote vendor you will not have access to any material apart from what is sent to you, and from what you describe, the documents may be sensitive, but not related to defense or national security. Therefore an NDA should suffice.
I suspect that the end client has some sort of blanket policy regarding drug testing that is blindly applied to all situations, much like ISO-certified companies requiring that suppliers make their facilities open to inspection, which in the case of translators is silly. The difference is that this policy is enforced. If enough people refuse, perhaps someone will wake up.
I suggest that you politely inform the client that complying with their requirement would be an unwarranted invasion of privacy, and that submission to drug testing would be an inconvenience and represent uncompensated utilization of your time as a professional. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Drug tests and background checks? | Wordfast Pro | Translation Memory Software for Any Platform
Exclusive discount for ProZ.com users!
Save over 13% when purchasing Wordfast Pro through ProZ.com. Wordfast is the world's #1 provider of platform-independent Translation Memory software. Consistently ranked the most user-friendly and highest value
Buy now! » |
| | Pastey | Your smart companion app
Pastey is an innovative desktop application that bridges the gap between human expertise and artificial intelligence. With intuitive keyboard shortcuts, Pastey transforms your source text into AI-powered draft translations.
Find out more » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
