Should CAP Senior Members & Paid Staff Be Randomly Drug Tested?

[RiverAux]

It's interesting that CAP'ers want to talk the talk & walk the walk as far as  a military auxiliary, but bring up random drug testing and there seems to be resistance.

There is resistence because you have not shown any evidence that it is a necessary expense or that it would accomplish anything.   There are plenty of programs that make sense for the military that don't necessarily make sense for us (not that I think random drug testing is necessary for the military either). 

[Strick]

yeah, I am going to have time to go take a p*%#!* test during the day.  Please dont sugget that we create a duty postion for a guy at the squadron to collect it.  I think drug testing is a good idea, but this is not the place.   If we adopt a program where does it stop.... Cadet Comp,,, .   

[AirDX]

The original message is the kind of post that always makes me wonder if it's legitimate inquiry or just someone trying to light off a flame war.

Is there a problem in CAP, or is this a solution in search of a problem? 

Others have already mentioned the cost.  Do you have any notion of how much work goes in to a program like this?  I was until recently responsible for random testing in a small Part 121 airline flight department... maybe 80 personnel all together.  It took probably two days a month of scheduling, fiddling, and paperwork.  Magnify that by the entire CAP, and you'll have an idea what the job would entail.  Do you have someone in your squadron willing to spend a couple of man days a month on being the drug testing officer?  And it's hideously expensive.  Unless there's a known, systemic problem, we don't need to go there.

Post-accident drug testing I can see a use for.  It would be very difficult to manage properly, though.

And I wonder how redundant it would be - how many of us are already covered under random testing programs where we work?  I am, and I'll bet a significant percentage of us are.

[RADIOMAN015]

The original message is the kind of post that always makes me wonder if it's legitimate inquiry or just someone trying to light off a flame war.

Is there a problem in CAP, or is this a solution in search of a problem? 

Post-accident drug testing I can see a use for.  It would be very difficult to manage properly, though.

There's no intention by me to start a flame war on the board.  IIsn't the lobby the proper place to bring up potentially controversial subjects

I agree with others that even random testing in the military may not be necessary BUT acts as a deterrance to illegal drug usage.   I always found that commander directed testing because of a incident  (accident or personnel management related) or information from investigative sources (e.g OSI)  had a higher hit rate than the random testing, but it too was not very significant overall.

I agree that implementation of this in CAP, including post accident/incident would be difficult to implement as some have indicated. 

Hopefully the consensus of the group that this is a solution in search of a problem is correct.   HOWEVER, without a testing program one will really never know (or perhaps a better way to put it is that NO one really wants to know).

RM             

[Johnny Yuma]

Are you effing joking???

Random pee tests for a volunteer .org? We've got enough problems recruiting and retaining members without having to go through this crap.

You want to dope test someone after a major accident, say you total an aircraft or vehicle accident with injuries, we can talk. Those are few and far enough between that it might be worth the effort.

I've got enough to do at wing than worry if I should have stuck my Whizzinator in my pocket before I drove to Salina.

[PaulR]

If there was a way to have it funded,  I would agree with this policy... especially for pilots.

If being substance free(especially as an aircraft operator or a Senior in charge of cadets) is an issue for someone, is this really the type of member we would want to retain?   

When dealing with aircraft, most post accident testing is post mortem.  I prefer to prevent accidents over investigating them.

[Airrace]

I would have no problem with drug testing Senior members and paid staff. The only problem I see is the cost. A drug program I belong with my employment cost $100.00 every time someone is radomly tested.

[davedove]

Like has been said, this seems like a solution looking for a problem.

If there is a significant problem within CAP, and I'm not talking a few isolated cases, then the cost and effort is not justified.

I understand about preventive measures, but we don't round up a whole neighborhood because one of them MAY have committed a crime.

[flyerthom]

This is my 12' pole:

{redacted}

that i'm not touching this subject with.

You're an overachiever. Most people use the standard ten foot pole.

Yeah I know. It's all I could find on short notice. I was gonna use the 8' one that telescopes to 24', but THAT would have been overachieving.

I need one of those for work. It would help us place the blade tie downs.

[PHall]

This is my 12' pole:

{redacted}

that i'm not touching this subject with.

You're an overachiever. Most people use the standard ten foot pole.

Yeah I know. It's all I could find on short notice. I was gonna use the 8' one that telescopes to 24', but THAT would have been overachieving.

I need one of those for work. It would help us place the blade tie downs.

You find those at Home Depot.  Extendable light bulb replacement tool. Replace end fixture with a hook made from #10 wire and there you are. And it collaspes down to 36 inches.

[evolocomotive]

This is my 12' pole:

that i'm not touching this subject with.

Amen!!

[Major Carrales]

The logistics of simply getting people to take the EO training and Ground Handling Videos demonstrates one potential set back in implementation.  I will point out a few other flaws, to add to the ones already listed in the above thread I have read.

1) The nature of CAP, spread out, where even metropolitan units, like Corpus Christi, are isolated from their Group and Wing Command (250 miles or so to Group, some 400-plus miles to Wing)  We hardly ever even see Group and Wing Staff in our area...now you would have one come in to enforce a screening.  The only other alternative would be to send a CAP Officer a letter demanding a test be taken locally.  This would violate the integrity of the test.

2) Every unit has people on their roles that are not active although listed as "active members."  They continue on in CAP merely to contribute money or to prevent their file from erasing when they wish to or can be active.  While they should become patrons, there is no current way (short of ghost squadrons) to force them to patron status.  When these people become selected (Congrats!!! Urine the the new program!!!) what then?  Wasted money, time and probably hassle.

3) Random? Really?  I've seen people "randomly" selected for jury duty some time five times in two months.  I imagine that a person could find themselves "selected" a little too often.  This would smack of some for of machination to "drive them off."  I smell LAWSUIT!!!

4) Which program is going to have to be curtailed or sacrificed to pay for such a program?  ES?  AE? CP?  The USAF would not spend a dime, cut a program nor even try to allocate for such a thing.  One could call for "volunteer random screenings," where one is selected and the volunteer pays for the screening under the auspices of the Unit Commander or other official.  They could then cite refusal to pay as proof of a violation of the Core Value or Integrity and issue a CAPF 2b. However,  I think everyone would label that ridiculous.

12 foot poles be darned!!!

[mikebank]

I think when I start getting a paycheck from the CAP they can test my urine.

[James Shaw]

They can test me anytime they want . I have nothing to hide. Now my point...would this be ncesessary. I am 100% in support of testing if you are involved in any accident. ONLY

I think it should be the newest 2nd Lt. After all the rank matches the color..heheheh