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.
Aannnddd....you have a Rx, you are supposed to disclose the Rx -with the accompanied script- when a drug test is given by an employer. Verifiable.
This doesn't answer my question...
But that rule still doesn't apply to cannabis, even in states where it's legal (medically and/or recreationally). If my employer said "no THC can be present," it doesn't matter if you have a prescription - so that's irrelevant to my question, anyway.
"better opportunities"
rolling on the floor laughing yet again
yeah right moving up the chain into those lofty prime better career advancement opportunities that let you be stoned on the job and engage in substance abuse. the recruiters will be banging at her door and her phone will be ringing off the hook for sure.
i can see the thread here on CD "what are the best career opportunities to work where employers don't do drug testing" and in the job interview "do you have any questions for us" "uh yeah i can smoke pot right?"
there was an electronics manufacturer in a town where i lived for several years who would not even hire anyone who smoked tobacco. if someone lied and got caught they were fired. condition of employment. documented higher health insurance costs, documented higher absenteeism, documented lower performance (all those smoke breaks away from their desk) to name a few reasons.
If an employer didn't test for cannabis they could have users as employees for years without suspecting a thing. Then there are the cannabis users that own businesses and take in millions. Cannabis is good for relieving pain, with no hangover or headaches, so it reduces absenteeism. Also, the effects of cannabis last for hours, not minutes like nicotine cigarettes, so all those smoke breaks wouldn't be needed.
In North Korea, cannabis is legal and sold very cheaply in open markets. The reason is they have many manual laborers who get sore muscles, and they don't want workers who need to take every other day off to recover. So they found cannabis benefits both employers and employees.
I am married and have a two year old son and my husband isn't mad but now due to our stupid puritan society I have to look for another job.
OP, what industry did you work in? Many occupations (like mine) are subject to drug testing by federal regulation, not because of company policy or "puritan society."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Graywhiskers
Executive management can afford the better pharmaceutical drugs, as well as cocaine. But they are never tested.
That's because executive management isn't performing safety-sensitive functions. Those of us who are performing such tasks are subject to testing precisely because we are performing safety-sensitive work.
I feel for you OP. Eventually no work place will be able to maintain staff with archaic drug policies.
Sad to think an alcoholic or cocaine addict will pass the test and you a simple pot smoker would not.
I have been stoned for years...I work out, read everyday, and otherwise live a decent life and treat people well....none of it is life threatening to anyone. Why would somebody not want me to have a paying job ?????
All you boozers, sugar addicts , nicotine junkies , trans fat gliders need to .........
Maybe on the next interview ask if Vicodin, Xanax and Valium are immune to company drug policies. I bet they are....hysterical.
Wait what? Why would a company invite NORML to a work function?
NORML is a disguise for a leftist political group. If you have ever been to a meeting ( which I have ) you will realize that marijuana is only used a as a ruse to lure unsuspecting people into the left leaning agenda. Hardly anyone discusses marijuana unless they are pushing a product or trying to network to make money.
NORML is a disguise for a leftist political group. If you have ever been to a meeting ( which I have ) you will realize that marijuana is only used a as a ruse to lure unsuspecting people into the left leaning agenda. Hardly anyone discusses marijuana unless they are pushing a product or trying to network to make money.
Don't be fooled.
Even if you were right, they don't need to "push a leftist agenda" to a bunch of library workers in the Bay Area... that would be about as useful as proselytizing at a Bible Sellers' convention.
As I explained above, it's probably more about informing us on a "hot topic" for programming reasons - and they're not even allowed to sell us anything, since we're a government agency. They only make rare exceptions to that rule, like when our keynote speaker one year sold book-bags for charity. Otherwise, it's strictly a non-profit event.
Honestly, I know it's easier said than done but if pot was as important to me as it was over five years ago I would have moved to where it's legal.
I don't think it's stupid you got fired over it because it's policy. I feel like most places don't drug test anymore but I guess it depends on the job and what you're doing.
Back when I smoked pot, I lost a job opportunity due to the drug testing and lesson was learned. Haven't had any weed in over five years now. But like I said above, if I still did - or if it was important to me, I would move to where it's legal. At least that's an option for you now.
The point of drug testing is to make sure workers are NOT under the influence of illicit drugs while working.
With that said, I hope they will soon have a way to determine how much THC is in a person's system at a given point in time.
If a person is under the "influence" of THC while working, if it can't be noticed by the quality or quantity of their work, are they really "under the influence"? And if an employer can fire a person who fails on quality or quantity of work, why do they need to know the reason? Are they gonna get the cops in there right away, to make sure they get a punishment almost equal to murder for not harming anyone?
Unlike alcohol, THC doesn't cause violence or make people do anything they otherwise wouldn't do. The worst thing THC can do is cause a previously unexperienced feeling that could cause panic about the possibility of a serious medical problem. A person who is experienced with that amount of weed at that THC level knows almost certainly they won't panic or has already reduced their dosage. The problem is street dealers that don't know the strain they have or THC level. Just another reason legal dispensaries are better.
Independent labs do the testing and also check for contaminants.
On Amazon there are cheap THC testers. One lets one know if their THC level is over 20mg and the other if over 50mg, IIRC. They are not saying people over those amounts are definitely impaired, only that it is a possibility and that should be determined by other tests.
In some areas where cannabis is partly legal, some law enforcers got to put in per se (just pretend) impairment as any trace. This to me would seem about the same as changing alcohol drunk level from .08% B.A.C. to .01% B.A.C., or even lower if it could be detected. With the per se law, any cannabis user would lose their job unless someone else drove them.
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.
