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.
I can't find anywhere that says when this random drug test was taken. I find it hard to believe that this test was taken off-hours, so I'm guessing he tested positive during work hours. He may have smoked it on his free time, but the affects were evident in his system during work hours.
Until anyone can prove that having an illegal drug in his system does NOT affect his ability to perform his job, I'm siding with the employer on this one.
I see you don't know much about cannabis, do you?
One of the most commonly known facts is that you can test positive for THC for days, sometimes weeks, whereas the psychoactive effects lasts only hours.
In my case, I use it every day, and have done so for 44 years. I own and operate 3 businesses, have been a constant homeowner and taxpayer since 1978, have never been on any type of government assistance, have a 800 credit score, etc. etc.
I guess none of that matters though, because it's an "illegal drug". Does that mean once it is legalized that suddenly I will be able to perform my job?
I can't find anywhere that says when this random drug test was taken. I find it hard to believe that this test was taken off-hours, so I'm guessing he tested positive during work hours. He may have smoked it on his free time, but the affects were evident in his system during work hours.
Until anyone can prove that having an illegal drug in his system does NOT affect his ability to perform his job, I'm siding with the employer on this one.
The problem is that drug testing for marijuana can detect trace amounts of THC in a person as long as a month after they last smoked a joint - way past the point when the person is no longer stoned.
The test is simply too sensitive to be used for what employers need to know, which is whether a person is actually intoxicated during working hours.
(The same issue comes up with several other drug tests as well. Testing for opiates will be positive if I shoot some heroin before coming into work - but it will also be positive if I ate a poppy-seed bagel that morning. Taking certain cold medications can cause a positive test for amphetimines. Really, the only drug test that's ideal for detecting abuse during work is the one for alcohol, because metabolizing alcohol doesn't produce any long-lingering metabolites that will be detected in the screening. If someone has detectable levels of ethanol in the blood, they've been drinking VERY recently.)
And what other perfectly legal behavior, conducted strictly during off-work hours and not effecting job performance, can an employer ban? Smoking? Drinking alcohol? Riding motorcycles? Rock climbing? Recreational sex? Surfing the internet? Watching TV?
There need to be limits on just how far an employer can encroach on employees private lives, and those limits need to be based on actual work needs. Workers are not the personal posessions of employers.
Like I said, I support the right of an employer to hire and fire whomever for whatever reason, but it doesn't mean I agree with it. There is no doubt that many employers have become wanna-be dictators. And quite frankly, I won't work for someone who feels they can tell me what I can and cannot do in my private life. Especially given that I work in the professional world. But you know what? We allow it. Be it with the government, or with employers we've allowed our personal rights and liberties to be eroded. We continue to sacrifice our individual freedoms in exchange for more security. So, in a lot of ways it is our fault that it's gotten this bad in all aspects of life. The only ones who don't seem to have to play by the rules are the fat cat CEOs of the mega corps, athletes and other celebrities, and the idiots that we elect on all levels of government on BOTH sides of the aisle!
Not all situations are the same, to treat this guy the same as someone who is a regular drug addict is totally unfair. Not saying drug addicts are bad people. This guy need those medications.
Until anyone can prove that having an illegal drug in his system does NOT affect his ability to perform his job, I'm siding with the employer on this one.
I am just amazed by how many people there are who cares very little about reality, and prefers to base their assumptions and decisions on some number.
The best way to determine if someone can perform their job is to monitor their performance! How can there be a better test for impairment?
These people could watch me perform some of the most complex and detailed tasks ever, day after day, week after week, and be completely amazed. But if suddenly a test was performed to determine if I had any substances in my body and it was positive, I would suddenly become unable to perform my job in their eyes.
I'm just floored at how reality doesn't matter anymore in this politically correct country of ours.
I can't find anywhere that says when this random drug test was taken. I find it hard to believe that this test was taken off-hours, so I'm guessing he tested positive during work hours. He may have smoked it on his free time, but the affects were evident in his system during work hours.
Until anyone can prove that having an illegal drug in his system does NOT affect his ability to perform his job, I'm siding with the employer on this one.
There is no test for active THC, what they test for is the metabolites of THC, the metabolites are what you body breaks down THC into. THC metabolites are stored in fat cells in the body, unlike alcohol, cocaine, meth, opiates etc which are broken down and eliminated from the body in 2-3 days, THC metabolites are slowly released over a 30 day period. Once metabolized, THC is no longer getting a person high, its just that the metabolites are stored in fat. So until testing improves, employers are weeding out (yeah its a pun) the pot smokers, while giving the alcoholics, cocaine/meth/opiate junkies a free pass.
If a company does not want you to use drugs while you work for them they have every right to fire you when they find out you do. I guarantee he signed something upon hiring stating this. It's their decision.
Living in Denver and having legal pot doesn't mean you can smoke it and work wherever you want. My bf cannot do any drugs at all as his company does not allow this. If they do a RA and he's caught he's fired. I don't think a little puff puff is worth a $140k year job to him..
A company is only paying for a persons time on the job, they do not own the employees and have NO RIGHT to dictate the activities off the job.
everybody missing the point, an condition of employement was zero policy. he sign a paper, he tested positive, he gone. it was a conditon of employment. it doesnt matter if he could do his job or not. it was a condition of employment
everybody missing the point, an condition of employement was zero policy. he sign a paper, he tested positive, he gone. it was a conditon of employment. it doesnt matter if he could do his job or not. it was a condition of employment
Tell me something, brown. If it were that simple, how the heck did it make it all the way to the Colorado Supreme Court, which took years?
Since caffeine is a drug, if tomorrow they decided to add caffeine to their "zero policy", would all the employees who get fired for drinking coffee have a legal case against the employer?
And what other perfectly legal behavior, conducted strictly during off-work hours and not effecting job performance, can an employer ban? Smoking? Drinking alcohol? Riding motorcycles? Rock climbing? Recreational sex? Surfing the internet? Watching TV?
There need to be limits on just how far an employer can encroach on employees private lives, and those limits need to be based on actual work needs. Workers are not the personal posessions of employers.
For my job ..lots of off duty behaviors ... including any act that brings you into the negative purview of another law enforcement agency...and... we are required to self report.. fail to do so is grounds for dismissal.
Any negative off duty act.. intoxication .. disturbing the peace.. anything you can think of can find me terminated.... and I'm held accountable to a 2500 page policy and procedures manual.
Again... this isn't about marijuana... god knows this guy is the poster child for marijuana use... BUT.. he knew the score going in... and he wanted a change that didn't work for the company.... he needs to find a mj friendly employer who doesn't care...
If I were he I would write all the ceos that the mj posters always put forth as users asking one of them for a job based upon his performance...if it was any good and if he was competent
As far as what he was being tested for dish tested for a multitude of drugs...not just mj.. so the poster that said that was wrong
Also glossed over and dismissed by mj proponents was the evidence demonstrated
Mj users are more likely to sustain on the job injuries
More likely to commit employer theft
More likely to use sick time
More likely to have unexcused absences
Bottom line... employers look at productive ability of employees to get the job done as efficiently as possible ... profit or mission being the driving factors... anything that diminishes that would be looked at... that's simply smart business
Last edited by notmeofficer; 06-17-2015 at 06:34 PM..
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.
