Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Correct. Which is why I like the company that I work for. While we do have a production side, they still do not feel the need to try and be a bunch of nannies. In a way it's also kind of like a don't ask don't tell. I've worked for a big company, and now I'm with a small company, and I can tell you I will never again work for ANYONE who feels they need to play dictator, and want to enforce a policy that extends to my private life, just because of some red tape bureaucratic BS from the insurance companies. When I'm putting in my 8 hour day, I'll give you my all, and do my job to the best of my abilities. Outside of work... stay out of my private life.
And I work for a large company but it doesn't do pre-employment drug tests. This is actually the first company I've worked for as a professional that doesn't test, but I'm fine with that. Everyone that I work with is professional and I don't know or care what they do outside of work as long as it isn't affecting my duties.
I spent a long time working for the DoD with a TS clearance and if you had any history of drug use it's hard to get that clearance. Nobody will even talk about what they might have tried in high school or college for fear of losing that clearance. I for one have no problem with drugs, I choose not to use anything that is illegal but I enjoy my beer. If marijuana was legal here I'd consider if offered, but I don't see Texas legalizing marijuana. With that said, if I owned a business I'd want to have the option to choose who I hire. I wouldn't drug test and wouldn't care if someone smoked anything as long as they did their job, but I'd want to have the option to screen for these things.
Businesses have every right to exclude hiring workers who use nicotine or other drugs unless using those drugs puts the user in a protected class. Those that don't agree with these policies probably aren't a good fit for the company's culture, so they would probably be better off finding somewhere else to work.
I imagine a lot of the companies that are drug free now will continue to stay that way even as marijuana becomes legalized unless they have problems finding qualified candidates that don't use.
Bingo. They can decide they don't want to hire anyone that comes into an interview with a red shirt on. Nothing wrong with that unless it inadvertently discriminates against a federally protected group (say women are more likely to wear red than men; just an example).
Now is it the best hiring practice? No not necessarily, but there is nothing wrong with it at all.
And I work for a large company but it doesn't do pre-employment drug tests. This is actually the first company I've worked for as a professional that doesn't test, but I'm fine with that. Everyone that I work with is professional and I don't know or care what they do outside of work as long as it isn't affecting my duties.
I spent a long time working for the DoD with a TS clearance and if you had any history of drug use it's hard to get that clearance. Nobody will even talk about what they might have tried in high school or college for fear of losing that clearance. I for one have no problem with drugs, I choose not to use anything that is illegal but I enjoy my beer. If marijuana was legal here I'd consider if offered, but I don't see Texas legalizing marijuana. With that said, if I owned a business I'd want to have the option to choose who I hire. I wouldn't drug test and wouldn't care if someone smoked anything as long as they did their job, but I'd want to have the option to screen for these things.
I agree. What you do on your time is your thing. Just don't bring it to work, and don't let it interfere with your ability to complete your task! Heck, I may even toke with you, but not on company time. Never mix business with pleasure.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mizzourah2006
Bingo. They can decide they don't want to hire anyone that comes into an interview with a red shirt on. Nothing wrong with that unless it inadvertently discriminates against a federally protected group (say women are more likely to wear red than men; just an example).
Now is it the best hiring practice? No not necessarily, but there is nothing wrong with it at all.
No it probably isn't the best hiring practice. Perhaps once the federal ban on cannabis is finally repealed some companies may take a softer stance on testing. The downside is, as with testing for nicotine use (which is legal to consume) you could be doing yourself a disservice in limiting your options or the talent pool.
I imagine a lot of the companies that are drug free now will continue to stay that way even as marijuana becomes legalized unless they have problems finding qualified candidates that don't use.
I think a lot of the (non-heavy equipment and non-gov't contractor) companies that are "drug free" today only have these rules because of the pressure put on them to conform, not because of any legitimate business need.
Companies sometimes do remove their strict "war on drugs" inspired policies, but it usually takes a major change in management and culture for this to happen. When Sam Zell took Tribune Company private, one of the first major changes his new #2 (Randy Michaels) implemented was to throw out the employee handbook and replace it with the handbook from his previous company. The new handbook read in part:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zell Employee Handbook
"Rule #1: Use your best judgment.""Rule #2: See Rule 1."
. . .
* "7.1. If you use or abuse alcohol or drugs and fail to perform the duties required by your job acceptably, you are likely to be terminated. See Rule 1. Coming to work drunk is bad judgment."
* "7.2. If you do not use or abuse alcohol or drugs and fail to perform the duties required by your job acceptably, you are likely to be terminated."
Interesting changes, probably unrelated to filing for bankruptcy a year later.
So if someone smoked a joint let's say two weeks ago, keeping in mind that the effects of cannabis wears off in 1-3 hours, with no after effects, you're telling me that you believe they're still under the influence?
I never said that. But if someone used meth or crack a day ago, that will show up on the drug screening. But if you don't do a drug screening you wouldn't know. And as an employer that is certainly something I would want to know.
Doesn't bother me if a company wants to not hire someone who smokes weed. We all make choices and we have to live with the consequences. Do I think if someone smokes weed they are automatically a bad employee? No. But there are lots of things I think hiring decisions are based on that don't make sense.
12-18-2013, 01:21 PM
Guest
n/a posts
As a recreational smoker in a state that it is legal to do so in, and as a guy who needs to find a good paying job soon, I just don't know what to do.
Being cut off from society because of a legal habit I do on my own time?
Like I've mentioned previously, society is forcing us to go underground. The black market is all we have left, if we are to survive, and/or prosper.
So, really, it's society's choice as to what they want to do with us. Push us down, in which case I'll fight, or allow us to do something that is pretty harmless, no more harmful than alcohol, and continue to live and let live?
Your choice. Either way, we're not going away. Heck, we just made strides in staying...
As a recreational smoker in a state that it is legal to do so in, and as a guy who needs to find a good paying job soon, I just don't know what to do.
Being cut off from society because of a legal habit I do on my own time?
Like I've mentioned previously, society is forcing us to go underground. The black market is all we have left, if we are to survive, and/or prosper.
So, really, it's society's choice as to what they want to do with us. Push us down, in which case I'll fight, or allow us to do something that is pretty harmless, no more harmful than alcohol, and continue to live and let live?
Your choice. Either way, we're not going away. Heck, we just made strides in staying...
For sure. And there are plenty of companies who still hire, and don't p*** test. I do think that once the federal ban is repealed, (and I feel it will be, because history has shown us that prohibition doesn't work) the stereotype of cannabis users being a bunch of lazy stoners will eventually die.
If you really want to get hired, seems like stopping smoking for a month or so isn't too much to ask. I've had people come in for an interview who literally stank of cigarette smoke, we didn't call them back.
Unless you are involved in a workplace accident or your job involves driving or other heavy machinery, very few employers, including those with pre-employment screening, test current employees.
Most companies have a policy against measurable impairment on any kind, including alcohol and OTC/prescription drugs. This is doubly true for equipment operators and drivers. In the event of an incident, drug testing is mandatory.
Employees should be aware that recreational or medicinal use of any drugs can potentially impact their job and make their usage decisions based on that knowledge.
As a recreational smoker in a state that it is legal to do so in, and as a guy who needs to find a good paying job soon, I just don't know what to do.
Being cut off from society because of a legal habit I do on my own time?
Like I've mentioned previously, society is forcing us to go underground. The black market is all we have left, if we are to survive, and/or prosper.
So, really, it's society's choice as to what they want to do with us. Push us down, in which case I'll fight, or allow us to do something that is pretty harmless, no more harmful than alcohol, and continue to live and let live?
Your choice. Either way, we're not going away. Heck, we just made strides in staying...
Could just stop smoking pot? Plenty of jobs can be impacted by legal, extra curricular activities. I don't think most school districts would be cool with a kindergarten teacher who moonlights as a stripper, though neither is illegal.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Never mix business with pleasure.
