A useful exercise would involve examining each of these information-gathering techniques and deciding what conditions, if any, should be placed upon their use in order to protect employee right. First, we should require that the information sought through such techniques itself be job-relevant and legitimately knowable by the employer. For example, genetic screening to gather medical information that would then be used to disqualify people from work would be unjustified. To insure fully voluntary consent we might also require that employees be given prior notification before any of these methods are used. There is no reason that employees should not be fully informed of the uses for such things as blood or urine samples. Random or blanket use of such methods typically would be unjustified, and they should be used only when a reasonable just cause is established. For example, drug testing only employees involved in accidents is preferable to mandating that all employees submit to random testing. The guiding question for such an exercise should be, Has the employee given her fully informed and consent to the loss of personal information? Finally, such intrusive information-gathering methods as secret surveillance, and blood, urine, or genetic sampling should be used only as a last resort and all other less-intrusive techniques have been used or been rejected.