How do you feel about pre-employment screenings (drug testing, background checks, etc.)?

Thankfully, this nonsense is usually absent from academia, but unfortunately, it still permeates through the interview process of many industry jobs. Personally, I find it extremely offensive and insulting. An in-person interview should be sufficient in judging a person. There’s a lot one can tell from the eloquence of a person’s speech, a person’s demeanor, and the way in which a person presents oneself. A candidate for any job should be hired based on his/her credentials, knowledge, experience, and potential for contribution to the position.

Drug testing: Perhaps the most offensive type of pre-employment screening. Of course, no one wants to hire a lousy addict whose drug use is going to interfere with a job. However, whether a person is an addict should be at least apparent somewhat from his/her in-person interview and further apparent from one’s past accomplishments. Calling previous employers and reviewing past work performance and success should be enough to determine that a candidate is not a drug-addicted bum who is unable to accomplish the necessary tasks at work. Many brilliant minds enjoy occasional recreational drug use, and I believe it incredibly invasive to hold a person’s spare-time activities against him or her. The fact that marijuana is even illegal is absurd to begin with (but that’s a story for another thread—let’s restrict this debate to employment screening only, please). No potential employee should be discriminated against because he/she enjoys relaxing at home with a nice blunt at the end of the workday.

Background checks: Why should future life be hopeless for those who have made mistakes in the past? It’s really not any of an employer’s business to know that a candidate was a “hard partier” back in college and had a few run-ins with the local police. Prison exists for a reason. If a person is due to be punished, he/she will be incarcerated rather than showing up in a suit and tie at your company’s HR office. Once that time is served, this person should have a fair chance. But really, I am not trying to get into the life of convicted felons here, either. I’m talking about upstanding citizens who may have a few youthful indiscretions on their records that are nothing but a cause for embarrassment. Do you really need to know that your company’s brightest software engineer had this one crazy night back in college that resulted in a few mortifying charges? Again, and in-person interview should be sufficient for determining that a candidate is not a wasteful lowlife.

Credit checks: Okay, so I understand why a credit check is necessary if you’re applying for a loan. Whoever is lending you money wants to know that you’re going to pay it back. But for employment? Most have had financial difficulties at one point or another or were given a credit card in college they never should have been given. So now, this person needs a job in order to be able to pay these off! Why discriminate against him/her because he/she wasn’t able to do so in the past, thereby preventing him/her from ever being able to do so in the future?! Why do we live in a society that preys on those who have been fucked over to see how much more we can fuck them over?

Your company’s missing out if you reject that bright-minded fellow over there who just happens to enjoy indulging in marijuana usage to clear his head, had that crazy night back in college that left him with a misdemeanor, and has a credit score that plummeted when he was a poor grad student.

Discuss.