What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Nevada Becomes First State to Ban Employers From Testing Workers for Weed

Rocky Mtn Squid

EL CID SQUID
Veteran
nevada-bans-employers-testing-workers-weed.jpg


In a move that could blaze a small but important trail for workers’ rights across the U.S., Nevada has passed a bill telling employers and state agencies that they can no longer refuse to hire workers on the basis of their testing positive for cannabis. It’s a long way to come for a state that was once infamous for its notoriously strong prohibitionist laws penalizing those in possession of marijuana.

Last week, Governor Steve Sisolak signed AB 132, which prohibits the denial of employment to cannabis consumers after drug pre-screenings. Advocates are hailing the passage of the bill because it finally clears a major gap in the law between states that have rendered marijuana totally legal for medical or recreational purposes and those U.S. companies that try to block their workers from toking up at all.

In Nevada, as in the other several states that have made recreational cannabis legal across the country, employers were still able to turn people away from jobs if they failed the “whizz quiz,” or urine-based drug tests. NFL players seeking to recover from the intense physical pressures of football are unable to use cannabis-based remedies, doctors have lost their licenses for using medicinal cannabis, and 48 percent of businesses in otherwise weed-friendly Colorado have “well-defined” rules that allow them to fire employees if marijuana is detected in a worker’s test results.

According to the Nevada law, which kicks in January:

“It is unlawful for any employer in this State to fail or refuse to hire a prospective employee because the prospective employee submitted to a screening test and the results of the screening test indicate the presence of marijuana.”

However, a number of provisions in the bill complicate matters. Safety-sensitive positions including first responders such as firefighters and EMTs, doctors, transportation and construction workers are exempt from the bill, as are workers who belong to collective bargaining agreements—which bars union workers who are extant across numerous industries in Nevada, according to Merry Jane. Additionally, federal law demands that workers like truck drivers must take drug tests.


Source: https://themindunleashed.com/2019/06/nevada-bans-employers-testing-workers-weed.html


RMS

:smoweed:
 

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
lots of comments made online RE the federal drug testing requirements for federal contracts. almost nobody makes note of the fact, however, that those rules merely require that companies have a drug testing POLICY, not drug testing itself. random drug tests are not required; it is insurance companies pushing those. fuck a bunch of insurance executives & stockholders... THEY don't have to piss in a cup & prove their innocence in order to be employed.:moon:
 
G

Guest

lots of comments made online RE the federal drug testing requirements for federal contracts. almost nobody makes note of the fact, however, that those rules merely require that companies have a drug testing POLICY, not drug testing itself. random drug tests are not required; it is insurance companies pushing those. fuck a bunch of insurance executives & stockholders... THEY don't have to piss in a cup & prove their innocence in order to be employed.:moon:
This is another part of the puzzle which is yet to be worked out. Along with testing that is as reliable as a breathalyzer for alcohol.


Like it or not legalization of cannabis is a double edged sword. As it should be because with the freedom to legally consume without the worry of arrest also comes with the RESPONSIBILITY to not have detrimental effects to others just like the idiots who drink on the job and cause injury. Just like the idiots who drink and drive and get people, usually not themselves, killed or maimed by driving. Just like Just like the airline pilots who regularly get caught trying to fly a airplane full of people. Pick any ignorant and potentially dangerous situations that involve alcohol or any other drug from prescriptions to heroin and the same expectations for weed to be used responsibly isnt unreasonable.

Except for the Labowski and Spicoli crew who thinks any kind of expectations of acting responsibly is "like man a oppressive act by the man". Children and idiots. And for those folks who usually just hang in moms basement, so long as they dont cause damage in the real world they can cry all they want.

That is why so many of us who can see beyond the end of the joint want some reliable testing for sobriety so we can stop worrying about testing unless we are irresponsible and or just plain stupid and cant separate when we need to not be drinking or smoking from when we can.
 

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
This is another part of the puzzle which is yet to be worked out. Along with testing that is as reliable as a breathalyzer for alcohol.

That is why so many of us who can see beyond the end of the joint want some reliable testing for sobriety so we can stop worrying

breathalyzers for alcohol only tell how much alcohol you have drunk, they do not reliably measure impairment which is what is needed. cannabis users (normally) show no physical impairment AT ALL unlike folks who are actually drunk. i know folks (myself included) that .08 BAC is a fucking joke; it is but an arbitrary number they picked. if they pick a number out of their ass & say "if you smoked this much, we will arrest you because we will ASSUME you are dangerously intoxicated", then it is no improvement whatsoever. some old stoners can smoke till the sun rises & drive home safely, some newbs will be in serious trouble after a hogleg split 4 ways. i don't think they will ever find a suitable point where it truthfully shows impairment without being seriously flawed, just as .08 is...:tiphat:
 
G

Guest

breathalyzers for alcohol only tell how much alcohol you have drunk, they do not reliably measure impairment which is what is needed. cannabis users (normally) show no physical impairment AT ALL unlike folks who are actually drunk. i know folks (myself included) that .08 BAC is a fucking joke; it is but an arbitrary number they picked. if they pick a number out of their ass & say "if you smoked this much, we will arrest you because we will ASSUME you are dangerously intoxicated", then it is no improvement whatsoever. some old stoners can smoke till the sun rises & drive home safely, some newbs will be in serious trouble after a hogleg split 4 ways. i don't think they will ever find a suitable point where it truthfully shows impairment without being seriously flawed, just as .08 is...:tiphat:
I understand there is no way you will ever see anything other than what you want to see.

I as well can drink enough to kill a mule and still be upright and functional. That does not make it right to not to drive or do something that may jeopardize others or myself. I will be happy to go shot for shot. BUT me personally my weed tolerance is on the lower end. So if your pilot, surgeon, dentist or even the guy driving 75 miles an hour in oncoming traffic looks fine but is loaded to the gills would you still be comfortable putting your or your loved ones lives in their hands?



Let me go at this from a different direction. Regardless of how much I drink in a matter of hours my levels will be below the legal limit regardless. Except in the occasional functional alcoholic who will go into medical distress if they fall below certain levels. I had a brother like that who dropped dead after years like that. I digress.


In my state a few years back in a neighboring county a woman was involved in a car wreck with a fatality. It was a mid week work morning and the woman involved was on her way to work at a office job at a school. I cant say if she was at fault or not from memory. Being involved in a fatal accident the LEO made her do a blood draw. She came back positive for marijuana in her blood. With current testing it was argued it could have been before she left for work or days earlier. She claimed it was from the weekend and no marijuana was found in her car. The local prosecutor charged her for some flavor of manslaughter and she is serving time at this moment as far as I know.


Just a few weeks ago a similar situation sort of. Drunk driver crosses a divided 4 lane state road and head on into another car. Drunk driver dead. But the driver, not at fault, of the other car survived unhurt.

The driver of the car not at fault also was forced for a blood draw and found to have traces of marijuana in her blood. You can guess where this is going. Its ongoing and I dont know if the driver is being charged or not at this point.



My biggest point is if there was a reliable test to prove yeah the driver in each case had traces of marijuana in their blood but how much is above some obviously artificially low standards? A few hours? 12 hours? A few days?


Like it or not its the way the world is and you cant expect people in LEO or responsible for safety to not care. Thats why Im on board with some kind of reliable testing to at least show levels and timelines of use. If it could be proven marijuana had been used in over 4 hours or so no way would these two people be in the shit. And how many more across the country?
 

Douglas.Curtis

Autistic Diplomat in Training
If it could be proven marijuana had been used in over 4 hours or so no way would these two people be in the shit. And how many more across the country?
Well, since there's absolutely ZERO correlation between any detectable amount of THC and inebriation... there's zero point in chasing down testing for this.
:tiphat:

Test for inebriation, not cannabis.


Amazing to see such a messed up state as Nevada be the first state to make it law. Still be another 10+ years before they call it "Cannabis." lol
 

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
I understand there is no way you will ever see anything other than what you want to see.

I as well can drink enough to kill a mule and still be upright and functional. That does not make it right to not to drive or do something that may jeopardize others or myself. I will be happy to go shot for shot. BUT me personally my weed tolerance is on the lower end. So if your pilot, surgeon, dentist or even the guy driving 75 miles an hour in oncoming traffic looks fine but is loaded to the gills would you still be comfortable putting your or your loved ones lives in their hands?



Let me go at this from a different direction. Regardless of how much I drink in a matter of hours my levels will be below the legal limit regardless. Except in the occasional functional alcoholic who will go into medical distress if they fall below certain levels. I had a brother like that who dropped dead after years like that. I digress.


In my state a few years back in a neighboring county a woman was involved in a car wreck with a fatality. It was a mid week work morning and the woman involved was on her way to work at a office job at a school. I cant say if she was at fault or not from memory. Being involved in a fatal accident the LEO made her do a blood draw. She came back positive for marijuana in her blood. With current testing it was argued it could have been before she left for work or days earlier. She claimed it was from the weekend and no marijuana was found in her car. The local prosecutor charged her for some flavor of manslaughter and she is serving time at this moment as far as I know.


Just a few weeks ago a similar situation sort of. Drunk driver crosses a divided 4 lane state road and head on into another car. Drunk driver dead. But the driver, not at fault, of the other car survived unhurt.

The driver of the car not at fault also was forced for a blood draw and found to have traces of marijuana in her blood. You can guess where this is going. Its ongoing and I dont know if the driver is being charged or not at this point.



My biggest point is if there was a reliable test to prove yeah the driver in each case had traces of marijuana in their blood but how much is above some obviously artificially low standards? A few hours? 12 hours? A few days?


Like it or not its the way the world is and you cant expect people in LEO or responsible for safety to not care. Thats why Im on board with some kind of reliable testing to at least show levels and timelines of use. If it could be proven marijuana had been used in over 4 hours or so no way would these two people be in the shit. And how many more across the country?

we ALL see what we want. somewhere you got the idea i was arguing with you and you won't let go of the notion, wherever it came from. i ABSOLUTELY am in favor of finding a reliable method of determining impairment. i just don't see any method on the horizon that will "accurately" DO THAT with RE to THC. i apparently AM okay with driving in traffic with folks that are high. i undoubtedly do it every time i get in a car, lol. not gonna sit at home frightened of possibly impaired drivers OR wingnuts contemplating a shooting and/or death by cop. life is too short for me to worry about things with such an low % of happening like that.:tiphat: everyone, of course, is entitled to worry about whatever they want to...
 
G

Guest

Well, since there's absolutely ZERO correlation between any detectable amount of THC and inebriation... there's zero point in chasing down testing for this.
:tiphat:

Test for inebriation, not cannabis.


Amazing to see such a messed up state as Nevada be the first state to make it law. Still be another 10+ years before they call it "Cannabis." lol
I give up. Some of you just refuse to see that its NOT about just you. Its about having at least some kind of baseline that can be used at this point. And hopefully refined and improved. Remember the MD or pilot or engineer that designed the bridge your driving on may have smoked a shitload but he was sure he wasnt inebriated. In his mind. If you dont have any kind of responsibility or potential for injury in your job or daily life smoke away. ME I want accountability for people like that. I work in a very large manufacturing facility and virtually every day people come to work under the influence and are caught because they are fucked up. I dont want some fuck head who thought they were "OK" be it drunk or stoned driving a 4-8 thousand pound fork truck. Or someone under the influence racking out a service center breaker. On the other hand because I smoke on the weekends or in the evening I have to worry because testing is so fucked up and unreliable. I dont want to be anywhere near someone who drank or smoked before work or at work which happens and fucks it up for the rest of us because some dumb fuck cant understand its not safe.



Im done trying because some of you only care about yourself and refuse to see there are millions of other humans in the country and world.
 

nickman

Active member
Veteran
I give up. Some of you just refuse to see that its NOT about just you. Its about having at least some kind of baseline that can be used at this point. And hopefully refined and improved. Remember the MD or pilot or engineer that designed the bridge your driving on may have smoked a shitload but he was sure he wasnt inebriated. In his mind. If you dont have any kind of responsibility or potential for injury in your job or daily life smoke away. ME I want accountability for people like that. I work in a very large manufacturing facility and virtually every day people come to work under the influence and are caught because they are fucked up. I dont want some fuck head who thought they were "OK" be it drunk or stoned driving a 4-8 thousand pound fork truck. Or someone under the influence racking out a service center breaker. On the other hand because I smoke on the weekends or in the evening I have to worry because testing is so fucked up and unreliable. I dont want to be anywhere near someone who drank or smoked before work or at work which happens and fucks it up for the rest of us because some dumb fuck cant understand its not safe.



Im done trying because some of you only care about yourself and refuse to see there are millions of other humans in the country and world.

I agree...!!!...
:)...
 

armedoldhippy

Well-known member
Veteran
I give up. Some of you just refuse to see that its NOT about just you.
Im done trying because some of you only care about yourself and refuse to see there are millions of other humans in the country and world.

we DO see it. YOU don't understand. a FAIR baseline is what WE want, and what we believe everyone deserves. no more bullshit DUI busts because your tolerance is double (or more!) than the guy working next to you. pretty sweet straw man you keep using in RE pilots etc, or folks running machinery, driving etc while fucked up. NO ONE here is advocating that, so. just. stop. it.:moon:
 

Douglas.Curtis

Autistic Diplomat in Training
I give up. Some of you just refuse to see that its NOT about just you. Its about having at least some kind of baseline that can be used at this point.
It's called a field sobriety test, and was developed and refined over how many years? Please get over yourself, we're ALL talking about everyone as a whole.

Cannabis is significantly safer than you seem to be aware, since it's public ignorance of cannabis which is infinitely more dangerous. Look a the destruction prohibition laws (created in ignorance) have done.
Tyvm. :tiphat:
 

HydroViking85

New member
Hi guys, I'm UK but thought I'd chime in anyway.
I cant imagine a world where everyone's allowed to be Stoned at work. Forgetting the pilots and construction workers etc. Let's take an average Joe's day off.
Wake up have a big spliff then jump in the motor Stoned with the family. Spend 20 minutes driving to the supermarket on roads full of Stoned teenagers.
Get to shop and the service staff are all melted too. Takes half an hour to scan your shopping cause they can't find the barcodes.
Come out the shop annoyed due to your poor service so have a spliff to calm down then get back on the road with all the stoners.
Drop shopping off and potter about a bit.
Get bored so decide to go for lunch. Another 20 minutes driving about with the stoners then finally get to the resteraunt. The servers are Stoned and fuck your order up, the chefs are Stoned and forget to probe your chicken.
Your Mrs recieves something she never ordered and your child gets salmonella cos he didn't notice the chicken was undercooked.
The manager offers you complimentary coffees and the now very Stoned waitress brings it over and drops the hot coffees all over your Mrs.
End up losing the next day at work cos gotta take said family to the doctors. Doctors Stoned and convinces himself it's something else so gives the wrong meds out.
Try to complain about it and the call handler is Stoned too and couldnt care less about your problem cos its ruining his vibe so again you get shit service.
A month later, everyone's recovered from their injuries so you decide to go on holiday. The travel agent just blasted a fat one too. Forgets to click a button and you end up wasting a week off work cos you get to the airport and realise he's booked one of your tickets to somewhere else.
I could go on like that all day.
Don't care what job your in, you shouldn't be Stoned at work. You certainly shouldn't be Stoned driving and whether you pour coffee for a living, fly planes or anything else in between. Yes I'm talking about absolute worst case scenarios but The chances of you having an accident and hurting someone or otherwise negatively effecting someone due to error are massively increased by being impaired at work.
Some guys do have a high tolerance. Some guys are just used to being absolutely melted 24/7 and can still function but for the vast majority of people. Allowing them to smoke at work would be a very bad idea.
 
Excuse Me

Excuse Me

View Image

In a move that could blaze a small but important trail for workers’ rights across the U.S., Nevada has passed a bill telling employers and state agencies that they can no longer refuse to hire workers on the basis of their testing positive for cannabis. It’s a long way to come for a state that was once infamous for its notoriously strong prohibitionist laws penalizing those in possession of marijuana.

Last week, Governor Steve Sisolak signed AB 132, which prohibits the denial of employment to cannabis consumers after drug pre-screenings. Advocates are hailing the passage of the bill because it finally clears a major gap in the law between states that have rendered marijuana totally legal for medical or recreational purposes and those U.S. companies that try to block their workers from toking up at all.

In Nevada, as in the other several states that have made recreational cannabis legal across the country, employers were still able to turn people away from jobs if they failed the “whizz quiz,” or urine-based drug tests. NFL players seeking to recover from the intense physical pressures of football are unable to use cannabis-based remedies, doctors have lost their licenses for using medicinal cannabis, and 48 percent of businesses in otherwise weed-friendly Colorado have “well-defined” rules that allow them to fire employees if marijuana is detected in a worker’s test results.

According to the Nevada law, which kicks in January:

“It is unlawful for any employer in this State to fail or refuse to hire a prospective employee because the prospective employee submitted to a screening test and the results of the screening test indicate the presence of marijuana.”

However, a number of provisions in the bill complicate matters. Safety-sensitive positions including first responders such as firefighters and EMTs, doctors, transportation and construction workers are exempt from the bill, as are workers who belong to collective bargaining agreements—which bars union workers who are extant across numerous industries in Nevada, according to Merry Jane. Additionally, federal law demands that workers like truck drivers must take drug tests.


Source: https://themindunleashed.com/2019/06/nevada-bans-employers-testing-workers-weed.html


RMS

:smoweed:

Excuse me, but it has been illegal for employers to test or even discuss weed since October 2018 when medical law went active. Oklahoma has the most progressive med mar law in the US.
 
Hi guys, I'm UK but thought I'd chime in anyway.
I cant imagine a world where everyone's allowed to be Stoned at work. Forgetting the pilots and construction workers etc. Let's take an average Joe's day off.
Wake up have a big spliff then jump in the motor Stoned with the family. Spend 20 minutes driving to the supermarket on roads full of Stoned teenagers.
Get to shop and the service staff are all melted too. Takes half an hour to scan your shopping cause they can't find the barcodes.
Come out the shop annoyed due to your poor service so have a spliff to calm down then get back on the road with all the stoners.
Drop shopping off and potter about a bit.
Get bored so decide to go for lunch. Another 20 minutes driving about with the stoners then finally get to the resteraunt. The servers are Stoned and fuck your order up, the chefs are Stoned and forget to probe your chicken.
Your Mrs recieves something she never ordered and your child gets salmonella cos he didn't notice the chicken was undercooked.
The manager offers you complimentary coffees and the now very Stoned waitress brings it over and drops the hot coffees all over your Mrs.
End up losing the next day at work cos gotta take said family to the doctors. Doctors Stoned and convinces himself it's something else so gives the wrong meds out.
Try to complain about it and the call handler is Stoned too and couldnt care less about your problem cos its ruining his vibe so again you get shit service.
A month later, everyone's recovered from their injuries so you decide to go on holiday. The travel agent just blasted a fat one too. Forgets to click a button and you end up wasting a week off work cos you get to the airport and realise he's booked one of your tickets to somewhere else.
I could go on like that all day.
Don't care what job your in, you shouldn't be Stoned at work. You certainly shouldn't be Stoned driving and whether you pour coffee for a living, fly planes or anything else in between. Yes I'm talking about absolute worst case scenarios but The chances of you having an accident and hurting someone or otherwise negatively effecting someone due to error are massively increased by being impaired at work.
Some guys do have a high tolerance. Some guys are just used to being absolutely melted 24/7 and can still function but for the vast majority of people. Allowing them to smoke at work would be a very bad idea.
You are way off dude, there is nothing wrong with being high anywhere unless your a light weight who shouldn't be smoking anyway...the right kind of weed can enhance performance in everything you do ;)
 

Drewsif

Member
If I haven't smoked in 3 years I'm gonna be too high to drive the first couple of days starting back up.
But 6 months later vaping 24/7 i dont wanna get busted for being less impaired with higher levels of marijuanas in my blood.

Thats why field sobriety tests make sense. Dont think I could pass a marijuana test, ever.
 
Top