stemming from drug abuse has a negative impact on U.S. competitiveness in the world market. Those who are in favor of mandatory drug testing believe that employers have a right to maintain a drug-free workplace and that employees must submit to company policies on the issue if they want to keep their jobs. This is particularly true in the case of jobs which involve public safety. Therefore, those who favor drug testing consider it to be especially important among employees in such fields as the airline and railroad industry.
Those who oppose employee drug testing consider the practice to be an invasion of privacy. It is argued that the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution forbids unreasonable search and seizure, and that drug testing is one form of unreasonable search. on the basis of this argument, "civil libertarians around the country have taken the issue to court, complaining that the Fourth Amendment's prohibition on unreasonable searches is becoming the first casualty of the war on drugs." Another argument against drug testing in the workplace is that the practice is demeaning to the employee. It is felt that drug testing is an act of humiliation because it requires that the employee urinate into a cup while an attendant watches or listens. Yet another argument against drug testing on the job is the possibility that test results may be in error, thereby persecuting innocent people or perhaps letting drug abusers go free. Still other opponents of workplace drug testing have argued that the erosion of the right to privacy may lead to more severe abuses in terms of employer or government intervention. In this regard, some critics of drug testing have claimed that the practice "would erode the privacy primarily of innocent people, preparing the way, perhaps, for dragnet office searches, blanket AIDS testing or searches of anyone crossing a U.S. border." At its most extreme level, this argument has expressed fears...