Drug Tests

[tabbyblack13]

All I know that at my company if the quick test shows anything positive no matter what, you get payed leave until they send the sample into a lab to see what you have taken. There is another test that can be done to see the history of your intake. It requires a hair sample. What ever you have taken gets absorbed into your hair root. As it grows out your drug record is locked into each individual hair. That test is for some of the major oil companies due to the amount of drug abuse of the riggers.

As for sobering up. I think alcohol is the quickest but other drugs stay in your system longer even when your are not feeling the effect.

[Nyoibo]

Is there just not a way to test for alcohol? Would there be too much of a controversy with that since it's legal in most places?

Yes, I have had jobs where they do random breath testing as well as drug tests, it's not really controversial because being at work drunk is still illegal, however alcohol is legal, pot isn't, didums if you think it should be, the fact is that right now it isn't, so if you're going to get fired for doing something illegal, then don't do it.

And the example of not getting a job to feed your family because you smoke pot, stop smoking and use the money to feed your family, what, you can't afford to eat but you can afford to get high?

[anriana]

Yes, I have had jobs where they do random breath testing as well as drug tests, it's not really controversial because being at work drunk is still illegal, however alcohol is legal, pot isn't, didums if you think it should be, the fact is that right now it isn't, so if you're going to get fired for doing something illegal, then don't do it.

Since the thread was more about pre-hire tests, that's what I was referring to. I know it's not legal to be drunk at work. My point was that regular heavy alcoholness is, imo, more damaging to productivity than regular pot use.

[Flyndaran]

...
Certain completely legal substances have been known to flag as a false positive. That's what bothers me, that if someone knows that a positive result is false they cannot (to my knowledge) demand a retest.

Recnetly, some professional sports player had his ban overturned, because it was determined that his excuse had merit. He apparently ingested a very tiny amount of cocaine by kissing some skank in a bar.
I often wonder if marijuana would help my anxiety and social phobia. The fact that my immediate family is highly allergic make this unlikely.
All things considered I bet extasy would be perfect. But how am I to score any if my anxiety and social phobia keep me from leaving the apartment let alone attending raves?
Balsted useless harmful laws.

[the_std]

Yes, because ecstasy is so safe that any law prohibiting it is definitely useless. I especially liked this part.

Recent research findings also link MDMA use to long-term damage to those parts of the brain critical to thought and memory. It is thought that the drug causes damage to the neurons that use the chemical serotonin to communicate with other neurons. In monkeys, exposure to MDMA for 4 days caused brain damage that was evident 6 to 7 years later. This study provides further evidence that people who take MDMA may be risking permanent brain damage.

I agree that the war on drugs is trite, overworked and completely ineffective. But that doesn't mean that all drugs are good, either. And I especially wouldn't want someone using ecstasy working for me.

[Slytovhand]

I'm sure people have inferred this but haven't said it outright... what if some client/customer has a bad run and decides to sue? For whatever reason, blame needs to be laid somewhere.. and it happens to be with someone who has drugs in their system??? I presume that would be a very bad scenario for that person....

What I do find ridiculous about these laws though (at least in places I've worked) is the hypocrisy! It's those in high management who are doing the drugs the most - such as cocaine and the likes... too bad there's not a lot that I, as the mere peon, can't do a hell of a lot about it. (ah... what I heard going down at the annual staff big pissup party at the end of the year...)

[Flyndaran]

Yes, because ecstasy is so safe that any law prohibiting it is definitely useless. I especially liked this part.



I agree that the war on drugs is trite, overworked and completely ineffective. But that doesn't mean that all drugs are good, either. And I especially wouldn't want someone using ecstasy working for me.

Most of that site was guilt by association and not science. So it's similar in structure to X, so it must have X's properties? Salt is sodium chloride is made up of two poisonous chemicals, so it must be bad too, right?

So many studies are absurdly flawed and backed by anti-drug propaganda. One famous study of extasy later turned out to be pure meth... no wonder they "proved" it to be dangerous.

My social phobia and anxiety are severe enough that I would risk quite a lot just to have one day a month free from them.

[BlaqueKatt]

Most of that site was guilt by association and not science. So it's similar in structure to X, so it must have X's properties?

x is mixed with one of two items-Meth or Heroin.

I took it once- didn't want to do anything but lie under a fuzzy blanket petting a cat for 6 hours-that wouldn't do much for social anxiety.

And pot well there's the paranoia side effect for one.....

[DrFaroohk]

It's not about the person you are, it's about the fact that you choose to break the law. Plain and simple. You know it's against the law and you still do it. That alone is enough reason for most companies not to hire you for liability purposes, let alone the myriad other reasons it might bring up.

I love it when people don't bother to read any of the other posts in the thread. If they did, they would have seen:

"Oh, well if he smokes pot, who knows what other laws he'll break!?!?!?!"

That's the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. They might as well say "Well, he got a traffic ticket! He CLEARLY BROKE THE LAW! HE MIGHT BE A MURDERER AND A RAPIST!"

Maybe YOU should NEVER EVER get a job now. OBVIOUSLY, YOU DON'T READ EVERYTHING! Maybe you might burn the building down because you didn't read some vital bit of instruction! DEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

Yeah so seriously, the point I'm getting at is that you can't connect things like that. Smoking weed before bed in the privacy of my own home has nothing whatsoever to do with whether or not I'm going to embezzle corporate funds and murder everyone at work.

Actually, you did. You went from being someone who has an excellent record, good appearance, projecting an image of trustworthiness to being someone who lied about an issue that could cause problems for the company.

What exactly did I lie about? I must have missed that. Not once did anyone say "DO YOU SMOKE POT?" And not once did I say "NO I DO NOT SMOKE POT."

Here's where someone is going to say: "DEERRRR! YOU DIDN'T VOLUNTEER THE INFORMATION DEEERRRR SO IT'S THE SAME AS LYING!"

Which still isn't lying. Lying is TELLING AN UNTRUTH. I feel sorry for everyone who just got smacked down there. But its true. I can't make pot legal any quicker than you can fabricate the word lie out of whatever you want.

Here's where someone says:

"DEEEEER!! BUT MY RETARDIPEDIA WEBSITE SAYS LYING IS BLAH BLAH BLAH DEEEEERR!"

Sorry, still wrong. I didn't lie to anyone about anything. I just didn't volunteer every little detail about my life. I didn't tell them about the wicked gas pains I had from being nervous, either. I guess that makes me a liar too!


DEEEEEEEEEEER!

[BroomJockey]

DEEEEEEEEEEER!

First, CHILL.

Second, lies of omission ARE still lies. Do whatever mental gymnastics you want, that's how it is.

Third, a company can connect whatever it damn well feels like, and if they're of the opinion that an employee who smokes pot is at greater risk of committing other illegalities, or is a lesser employee, or whatever value they want to attach to it, that's their right. You're the one going to them and saying "I would like to trade you my time and effort, and in return, I would like the amount of money you feel my labour is worth." Whatever strings they attach to it, you need to abide by, or they're fully entitled to not accept your offer of labour for money. The government has stipulated certain strings are illegal to attach, but beyond that, if they decided to say that every employee had to wear periwinkle on the second Tuesday of each month, and you had to learn Farsi in order to conduct internal communications, they're allowed to do so. If you have a problem with that, fine a company that doesn't put that string on the job.

[the_std]

I love it when people don't bother to read any of the other posts in the thread. If they did, they would have seen:

Maybe YOU should NEVER EVER get a job now. OBVIOUSLY, YOU DON'T READ EVERYTHING! Maybe you might burn the building down because you didn't read some vital bit of instruction! DEEEEEERRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!

Hey, guess what, I never said anything about you breaking other laws. It doesn't matter if you break any other laws, because you already broke one, and it's a pretty darn big one in the eyes of most companies. You smoking pot = liability for them. Plain and simple. I did read your other posts and simply wasn't addressing that point. Please don't condescend to me.

[Nyoibo]

You know what popped into my head reading this thread of "It's not fair, I smoke pot so I can't get a job"?

[Jim Carey] "STOP BREAKING THE LAW ASSHOLE!" [/Jim Carey]

You engage in an illegal activity, if you don't want to deal with the repurcusions, well then I wonder what you could do.

[Pedersen]

What exactly did I lie about? I must have missed that. Not once did anyone say "DO YOU SMOKE POT?" And not once did I say "NO I DO NOT SMOKE POT."

Actually, they very much asked whether or not you smoke pot. In fact, they asked about more than just pot. They asked "Do you use any substances at any time that could impair your performance or your judgment?" They asked this question in the form of asking you to take a drug test.

Had you volunteered that information, it is entirely possible that they would have still hired you. After all, you had managed to present a professional and trustworthy image to that point. Admission of that fact before it being revealed to your prospective employer would have gone a long way towards improving that image.

As it was, you have committed a lie: You have chosen not to tell them verbally about this illegal habit of yours, and hope that you would not be found out by the drug test. When that information comes out by way of drug test results, your previously trustworthy image is destroyed.

Another way of putting it: If your significant other were to stop taking birth control and not tell you, then when you found out, you would feel as if you were lied to. It's the same thing: A lie (in this case, a lie of omission). The consequences are different, the specifics of the matter are different, but the classification is the same.

Here's where someone is going to say: "DEERRRR! YOU DIDN'T VOLUNTEER THE INFORMATION DEEERRRR SO IT'S THE SAME AS LYING!"

I think you'll find that I've shown you did lie in answer to their question, but in case you haven't seen it yet, I'll spell it out as explicitly as possible for you:

They asked you take a drug test as a way of asking you "Do you partake in any performance or judgment impairing substances?" By failing to tell them verbally, you are attempting to lie to them (by taking the test and hoping that your positive results get flagged as a false negative).

Therefore, you are lying. And hoping you will not be caught.

"DEEEEER!! BUT MY RETARDIPEDIA WEBSITE SAYS LYING IS BLAH BLAH BLAH DEEEEERR!"

I'll help you out then, by giving you the link you were stating someone would give. After all, I wouldn't want to make you any more of a liar than you already are. And so, the Retardipedia website link.

Sorry, still wrong. I didn't lie to anyone about anything.

I'm impressed. The mental gymnastics involved here are mighty damned good, and should be on the Olympics team, I think. However, that level of mental gymnastics doesn't quite deserve to be on the podium. You might take 5th place with them, though.

[Flyndaran]

x is mixed with one of two items-Meth or Heroin.

I took it once- didn't want to do anything but lie under a fuzzy blanket petting a cat for 6 hours-that wouldn't do much for social anxiety.

And pot well there's the paranoia side effect for one.....

Again, guilt by association. I've met many that have used pot, but none that suffered that "likely" side effect.

[BroomJockey]

none that suffered that "likely" side effect.

I have. It's why I refuse to let my friends hang around when they're stoned.