Jobs at risk becuase of MMJ use?

[cobcoop]

An article from the Denver Post. I for one am very lucky to work in a very progressive environment, but many many others do not have that luxury. Anyone have any stories about MMJ and your work place?

http://www.denverpost.com/ci_14261008

 

[Totah Sam]

I used to work for Comcast. They follow federal policy. I know of two individuals who failed the drug test due to medical marijuana use and now are unemployed.

 

[10jed]

First off, the teacher blazing up at work? Way bad call! Maybe a small vape would be different, but being a school teacher is not the kinda career whey you could ever expect society to OK a smoke break at lunch! the others thoug, it is BS.

Reading this article and the ensuing comments has brought something to my mind. A friend of mine, who is an RN and an occasional OFF DUTY smoker told me that there is no way to tell from a urine or blood test if a person smoked an hour ago or a month ago. Or more specifically, that someone who is a heavy daily smoker builds up enough thc in his system that he could quit for a month and test the same as an occasional smoker who smoked that morning. In my friends opinion, this is why MJ will never be legal.

In thinking about this I worry that he may have something. It is all about placing blame in the corporate world... it really is. If someone gets hurt on their job and tests positive for mj then it is an easy way for the company to clean their hands of it and they like that. If someone is a threat to a superior (ie. smart enough to do the superiors job better) who suspects them of occasional use, they could possibly order a random test and have that person removed or at least black marked. Regardless if it has no bearing on the persons job function. This is where it all turns to bullshit.

Another friend of mine is a waitress and got a serious burn over the 4th of July from a firework incident and had to take a few days off work due to her hand being bandaged. Her company ordered a drug test from her for her absence even though she wasn't claiming workman's comp, nor was she at work or supposed to be at work when the accident occurred. It was her day off... She had smoked a few days before the incident and they fired her based on the drug test results!

Anyone who has ever worked in the service industry knows that people miss shifts pretty regularly and not often for a real reason like a bad burn on your hand. Usually it is a hangover or just having something better to do! Obviously, they wanted to get rid of her for something else and used this opportunity to fire her without effecting their unemployment insurance record.

I know everyone is different, but for me I don't often feel "impaired" by mj. Sure my outlook on life and my mood is a little different. Short attention span for the first 30 minutes or so sometimes, but never really physically impaired like alcohol. Maybe when I first started smoking, but 20 years later I don't. I have smoked a few strains that knocked me down a peg or two, but those are rare and really not what I look for in a preferred smoke other than at bed time. Regardless, I am never more than a couple hours from where I was before I smoked. Alcohol of course leaves your system far quicker, but you are impaired for as long as it is in your system. They can give you a breathalyzer and have a good idea if you are drunk or sober pending tolerances between people.

We all know that one of the huge money makers in the business of mj prohibition is testing. This is a billion dollar business that runs hand in hand with the phama and insurance companies. Insurance companies that provide workman's comp and medical insurance for large corporations are in bed with the pharmaceutical companies and the testing companies. THAT is a big tree to fell.

I am surprised that there has not been an independant, pro-mj initiative to develop an accurate means of testing for mj that shows actual impairment vs a 7-30 day history of random use.

Is there anyone working on this? It does make sense that an officer in the field would need a simple and acurate way to judge impairment. If there is an accident or other violation, ya gotta know where to put the blame!

Does anyone know about the science of this? Is this even possible?

Jed

 

[grasspass]

I believe when there is a market for an impairment test, like when cannabis is made legal, some one will figure it out and sell it. Right now there is no incentive.

 

[10jed]

I believe when there is a market for an impairment test, like when cannabis is made legal, some one will figure it out and sell it. Right now there is no incentive.

I guess I'm saying that there is incentive now for not having that test...

 

[One Love 731]

I got fired from my last job for reading the grow bible at my desk while on break, I have been growing strong ever since. All things happen for a reason, the trick is seeing the doors that open when others close. Because of my criminal record I cant get a job at McDonalds although I maintained a General Contractors for 8+ years. Life is good my friends and harvest will come soon enough. Karma, One Love

 

[milehimedi]

I heard there is a new handheld test soon to be released for police use. Supposedly it will be able to tell if ur high at the exact moment.

 

[cobcoop]

I love the double standard, cops can invade your privacy anytime they wish, but it takes the ACLU going to court to see what they are up to...

 

[Hydro-Soil]

There's NO way to develop a device that can tell if you're 'impaired' right away. Testing maybe... but not just through urine or breath or blood.

I guarantee that if you gave someone the same lvl of cannabinoids that I use daily.... they'd be completely wasted. Conversely, I lose functionality if I slack off.

You'll be able to measure the 'amount' to some degree but never someone's tolerance. Again, you have to actually 'test' them. Traffic enforcement already has the sobriety tests. If you fail those, you're intoxicated... period.
If you PASS, who gives a crap what levels of cannabinoids are in that person?

Testing for cannabinoids for employment is unconstitutional and I, for one, have quit working for people that require it years ago.

Stay Safe!

 

[10jed]

I heard there is a new handheld test soon to be released for police use. Supposedly it will be able to tell if ur high at the exact moment.

name or a link?

I guarantee that if you gave someone the same lvl of cannabinoids that I use daily.... they'd be completely wasted. Conversely, I lose functionality if I slack off.

Well, I think that they would certainly have to have some generalization. It would be interesting to know what type of limit they set and how they set it. There is a big difference in my impairment now vs what it was when I first started smoking. Same is true with alcohol though...

You'll be able to measure the 'amount' to some degree but never someone's tolerance. Again, you have to actually 'test' them. Traffic enforcement already has the sobriety tests. If you fail those, you're intoxicated... period.
If you PASS, who gives a crap what levels of cannabinoids are in that person?

I fully agree on this point, but to the people outside of the mj culture they relate mj intoxication to alcohol intoxication, or worse crack-meth-heroine... A device that can test levels is enough to shut them up, yet would mostly not be used unless somebody was obviously impaired and failed the manual tests. In this case the device would be affirmation from a legal standpoint like the breathalizer is now. That is what we need and would be OK in my book.

Jed

 

[10jed]

**edit** here seems to be the latest and the greatist... http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/06/philips-to-unveil-saliva-based-roadside-drug-test-later-this-yea/

I guess it wasn't so hard to find via goodle! Old news though...

http://cannabisnews.com/news/14/thread14786.shtml

Posted by CN Staff on November 19, 2002 at 13:47:45 PT
By Laura MacInnis
Source: Reuters

Roadside drug tests modeled after breathalyzers are nearly ready for use in the United States, helping police identify drivers impaired by illegal substances, officials said on Tuesday.National Drug Control Policy Director John Walters said the cheap, on-the-spot tests would hasten the arrest of those driving under the influence of illegal drugs like marijuana or cocaine, as well as alcohol.

"Soon officers will have the ability to positively identify someone who is endangering others' lives on the road," he told a news briefing at the National Drug Control Policy office. "This is not something we are powerless to do something about."
Walters said the drug tests were in the last stages of trials, but he declined to say when the new devices would be deployed. Similar technology has also been used in pilot tests in Britain and continental Europe.
Critics of America's so-called "war on drugs" said the new tests could spur an abuse of power by authorities aiming to crack down on recreational drug users.
"The way I understand it, if you have any evidence of the drug in your system you are presumed to be the equivalent of a drunk driver," said Ethan Nadelmann, executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance in Washington.
"We're not talking about a three or four hour window. A urine or blood test could show marijuana if you smoked a joint 10 days ago."
While he backed the campaign against impaired driving, Nadelmann said roadside drug tests would require lawmakers to agree on a minimum intoxication level, below which individuals would be free to go.
"Treat marijuana and other drugs the way we treat alcohol. Test for real impairment. Test for whether people are under the influence," he said.
Nevada resident Gary Thompson, whose wife Sandy was killed at a stoplight by a driver high on marijuana, said strict tests were needed to curb the social acceptability of drugged driving, particularly among young people.
"We don't care what people do in the privacy of their own homes, but we do care what they do on our roads," he told the news briefing.
"We have to make it possible to prosecute violators after innocent people die."

 

[guest2012y]

Cut your job and get a hair!....really though,drug testing crosses the personal human freedom line. What next,testing desirable human genetics for control over how we breed?

 

[Rednick]

Gattaca baby!

Like anything there are different tolerance levels. Two beers may get my sister plastered, but for me it just fights off the shakes
A woman driving while talking on her cellphone is more danger than me drunk behind the wheel. Why? Because I am actually paying attention to what the fuck I am doing, even if I am 'impaired'. I keep aware of my surrounding on the road, I look ahead, side to side, and behind me constantly so I know what I am going to do before it happens. Say should that same woman slam on her brakes because she just missed her turn and now is trying to cross four lanes of traffic. It happens with men too, but not quite as often.
The fact is, people need some catch all limit to feel safe. Either from the drunks or from the cops.

As far as smoking up at your school. This kid must have been a born and bred Idaho Springer. Dumbass.

Other people getting fired for what they do in their off time? Get a lawyer. Sue the bastard for wrongful termination. Or do nothing and just be the victim.

 

[Flying Goat]

Before MMJ patients can relax & be open, we must have a test for impairment.

I do not believe anyone should operate a vehicle or heavy equipment while "impaired," altho I must confess that since I am a med user, I will ALWAYS have cannabinoids in my blood & urine, so if I get pulled over, I will no doubt be popped.

However, I rarely leave home after I've been medicating unless someone else is driving, so that reduces my odds a bit.

I'd like not to have to worry about it at all.

 

[hazy]

Try not to shoot yourselves in the foot mmj users. And rec users too.

This "Test us" thing is even worse than the "regulate and tax us" crap that some mj smokers get hung up on in a hope that such concessions would make it more likely to be sort of legalized.

If I smoke a joint of Diesel and head into town for something, my driving ability is not impaired. Bad enough the non/anti-mj crowd thinks that were all fukked up and incoherent and I guess some mj users think that to.

Man, I'll never be able to go anywhere.

 

[10jed]

Try not to shoot yourselves in the foot mmj users. And rec users too.

This "Test us" thing is even worse than the "regulate and tax us" crap that some mj smokers get hung up on in a hope that such concessions would make it more likely to be sort of legalized.

If I smoke a joint of Diesel and head into town for something, my driving ability is not impaired. Bad enough the non/anti-mj crowd thinks that were all fukked up and incoherent and I guess some mj users think that to.

Man, I'll never be able to go anywhere.

Why would they pull you over and test you if you aren't impaired? If it was a BS traffic stop, then how hard would it be to present a note from your doc at the traffic hearing and have it all go away? Testing for a current level in your system is a really good thing. Would you rather be tested with a urine or blood test that shows that you have smoked recently instead of showing that you just smoked? Now they are testing for what has been in your system for days or weeks and not hours. How can that improvement be a negative? We all know that the effects of cannabis are short lived but thc shows in body fluids for a long time after the effect has worn off.

Right now the anti-legalisation (med or rec) folks are touting cannabis use by motorists as a big reason to not legalize. they show skewed statistics that show a large number of emergency room visits with people that have cannabis in their system. #1, they aren't separating those with only cannabis vs those with cannabis and alcohol. I think most would agree that if you smoke after you have a good drinking buzz going it really kicks things up a knotch! #2, I assume they are using conventional testing to produce these statistics so anytime a person comes through their doors and has any in their system from days or weeks ago they get flaged as an MJ related emergency visit. I need to research that 2nd one some, but that is my understanding at this point. Either way, if someone is going to accuse somebody of being under the influence then they should be able to show they are as opposed to showing they were last week.

Jed

 

[hazy]

Because if they pull you over for some traffic violation and decide that they think you 'look high', maybe your eyes are red?, so they test you and sure enough!

To be high is not to be an impaired driver. But cops and some folks here think it is so. They'll be happy to take you to jail for 'dui'

Show them your rec??! Assuming you live in a med state, and even then, are med users allowed to drive after medicating(smoking a j), after all you're impaired, right? I don't see how, that a get out of jail free card for mj DUI.

ps, Never noticed that smoking a j after/while drinking 'kicking it up a notch'. I knew this dude back in high school though:

Dude: Hey man, let's go listen o some Black Sabbath records man!
me: OK
Dude: We'll smoke a j and get ffffuuuuuckckcckkkeedddd up man!


whatever.

 

[qdavid]

To be high is not to be an impaired driver.
whatever.

That's just factually untrue. I know you go on to say many people THINK so, but that doesn't matter. Facts are facts. Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

 

[tokinafaty420]

I am surprised that there has not been an independant, pro-mj initiative to develop an accurate means of testing for mj that shows actual impairment vs a 7-30 day history of random use.

Is there anyone working on this? It does make sense that an officer in the field would need a simple and acurate way to judge impairment. If there is an accident or other violation, ya gotta know where to put the blame!

Does anyone know about the science of this? Is this even possible?

Jed

The police around here use a mouth swab to test for recently consumed drugs. MJ will show up on a mouth swab test up to 2 days after use. If positive it is enough to take you in for further tests such as blood which will determine how recently you smoked since traces of THC can be present up to 2 - 27 hours depending on the dosage. THC-COOH is another compound left in the blood from using marijuana, but since it acts the same as THC in urine it is typically not used to determine if someone has recently consumed.

 

[ijimunot]

Most companies could give a rats ass about federal drug free environment laws. What they do care deeply about is the insurance rates. Testing supposedly keeps company insurance rates down. But if you trust what a insurance company say I got a car ill sell you.
My brother worked at a company for ten years. My mother died and he took a week off for the funeral and get his head together. When he went back to work they tested him for the first time in six years. Fired do to cannabis use.
Truth was though he was at the top of his pay scale. He was replaced buy a guy at a much lower scale. Its not always about drug use and never will be.