RE: Ethics and Job-Hunting

Subject: RE: Ethics and Job-Hunting
From: bryan -dot- westbrook -at- amd -dot- com
To: "TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com>
Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 12:46:40 -0600

The only job I've had in the last 10 years that did not require a pee-pee test before starting was as a retail inventory auditor. Not surprisingly, that company was full of druggies, and when I was a team leader there I had to actually get one fired for it (well, actually for stealing Valium from a pharmacy we were counting and then driving a company van under the influence of 6 or 7 of them the next day).

-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Baresch [mailto:baresch -at- earthlink -dot- net]
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2001 12:40 PM
Subject: Re: Ethics and Job-Hunting

I do have another filter that I haven't seen mentioned: I'd have to be
desperate to take a job that requires a drug test for other than safety
reasons (e.g. operating heavy equipment). That aversion to unwarranted

Collect Royalties, Not Rejection Letters! Tell us your rejection story when you
submit your manuscript to iUniverse Nov. 6 -Dec. 15 and get five free copies of
your book. What are you waiting for?

Have you looked at the new content on TECHWR-L lately?
See and check it out.

You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as: archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit for more resources and info.

Previous by Author: RE: Ethics and Job-Hunting
Next by Author: RE: Ethics and Job-Hunting
Previous by Thread: RE: Ethics and Job-Hunting
Next by Thread: RE: Ethics and Job-Hunting

What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads