Drug Testing/pregancy Policy In The United States Navy.

One of the prerogatives of an employer is the hiring of federation personnel . During the hiring process , prospective employees turn a loss procedures , such as medicate screening , in to collapse off their fitness and competency in rendering their work to the federation . When they argon hired as employees , the employer would then once more claim them to undergo random dose testing from snip to judgment of conviction , for after all , an employee s qualification is non just during the hiring stop but must be passim his employmentThis holds true to the joined States naval tweets which recently imposed a zero-tolerance medicine indemnity ( HYPERLINK http /www .defenselink .mil /specials /drugawargonness /usnnews03a .html http /www .defenselink .mil /specials /drugawareness /usnnews03a .htmlThe U .S dark blue i mposes a mandatory drug-test on its sailors , and those who tested positive of drug use are subjected to disciplinary performs including discharge from serviceSo a chief now arises in the mind of the employee whether this drug testing is violating his touch on to privacy . The employer might answer the same in the damaging contending that such drug testing or screening is all for safety reasonsIn to answer the said issue , there are two schools of thought which should be considered . One is the Utilitarian object , and the second is the Deontological theoryUnder the utilitarian theory , while it is true that drug testing violates one s right to privacy , if it would benefit the companionship , the workers , and the employee himself , then it is justifiableUnder the utilitarian model , an good decision is a decision that produces the greatest good for the greatest number of washout (Jones et .al . 150A utilitarian sees random drug testing as truthful because more empl oyees and customers are protected from accid! ents caused by drug-using employees than those who are indicate by having to submit to random drug test (Gomez , et .al .

104Thus , it may permit subordination of the rights of a few single if a greater aggregation of good results (Linzer 41However , this theory clashes with the deontological theory which justifies meet as right because of a past relationship that antedates the bounty action (Schermerhorn , Jr , et .al , 36Under this approach , it is believed that each person has fundamental rights that should be protected and respected . A decision is un honourable if it deprives an soul of fundamental human rights (Gomez , et .al 103While the utilitarian theory determines the prese nt fair play of an act because of its future consequences , the deontological theory emanates from the established relationshipThese two ethical theories create an ethical dilemma . When two obligations conflict , the force is a deadlockIf one would follow one ethical linguistic rule , it would offer possible benefits but at the same duration violates the other (Schermerhorn , Jr et .al 36So , in to solve this dilemma , Ross , W .D introduced the topic of pluralism into the deontological theory . It offers some leeway in decision military reserve and an opportunity to use discretion in weighing priorities among prima(predicate) facie duties (as cited...If you fate to get a full essay, order it on our website: OrderEssay.net

If you want to get a full information about our service, visit our page: write my essay