# MMJ and jobs...



## ArtVandolay (Aug 4, 2009)

In MMJ states, if you're using MMJ, does it disqualify you for all jobs that test for drug use?

I suppose it would make sense that you can't be an astronaut or a commercial airline pilot, but what about general jobs at companies that do routine drug testing such as UPS driver, HVAC, operating construction equipment, bank teller?

What about state government jobs?


----------



## umbra (Aug 4, 2009)

I know in Cali this has been an issue. There have been court cases about this very issue. Current drug testing does measure when you consume, the way alcohol breathalizer tests do. If it is not essential to your job, then it should not make a difference what you do, after work. A lawyer would be your best bet concerning the law. But a civil case for violating the American Disabilities Act, could be really expensive.


----------



## ArtVandolay (Aug 4, 2009)

Thanks, umbra.  But if you saw a want ad and it said mandatory drug test, do mmj people even bother to apply or are they relegated to burger flipping and waitressing jobs?


----------



## StoneyBud (Aug 4, 2009)

Hey Art, I have no idea how this one will play out, but there are several angles that have to be considered when thinking about employment in this case.

1. If a person is using Medical MJ, they have a reason for that. If that reason is something like lower back pain, then their reason for using Medical MJ would disqualify them from jobs that require a strong, healthy lower back. They can't do one and have the other. "Oh it only hurts at night" probably won't cut it with a potential boss.

2. Jobs that require insurance to cover their product, like most manufacturing jobs, the insurance company is who demands that drug testing be included as hiring criteria. If an employee is hired without a drug test, then the insurance company won't ever cover any problems that involve that employee and would leave the employer at a loss. Most employers won't go near that one.

3. Jobs that have inherent danger or require absolute mental attention like jobs involving active flames, projectiles, crushing, lifting heavy objects, etc. will always involve drug testing for the same reason as #2 above.

I've never heard of a business that doesn't have insurance coverage in case of accidents to the structures, employees or products. This insurance is what drives the drug testing, not the employer in most cases.

Insurance companies are the bane of our existence. Over the decades, the insurance companies have developed statistics that show the likelihood of payout due to every conceivable occurrence that exists. Tens of thousands of different types of causes. Within those causes, drug use has shown itself to be an almost constant cause of a major portion of claims relating to damages. The insurance companies are covering their proverbial butts and wallets. You really can't blame them.

Look at how many times you've read or heard of cases where "the primary in the case has been tested and marijuana was found in his/her system".

I'm not saying that the MJ was the cause, but the insurance companies will ABSOLUTELY say that it is and THAT is what drives their requirement for drug testing on covered businesses.

It's damn hard to find a job that doesn't require it. If you ask those employers, most will tell you that their insurance requires it.

Best scenario is to lay off the MJ for a month, take the test, pass the test, get the job and then smoke all you want. I believe that this is what is done in a very, very high (no pun intended) percentage of all the jobs out there.

If you do that and then cause an accident that requires a drug test and are found to have MJ in your system, the employer is no longer at fault and damage claims can then be directed to you.

In real life, we all know that about a tenth of the population gets high on MJ pretty often. The ones who never cause problems and have never been "caught" are the vast majority, (like me).

It's another of life's games.


----------



## chris1974 (Aug 4, 2009)

I know that if any company requires drug testing for employment THC levels are screened in those tests and if your levels exceed a certain number, it disqualifies you !  My father inlaw just recently lost his job of 15 years as a disposal truck driver for testing positive for MJ use. He has a script and has been a light recreational smoker since the early 70's !  I dont agree with his punishment at all !   He never used durring work hours and is a very responsible and productive person. The only good thing that was able to come from this, was they atleast gave him a good recomendation and he was able to find another job as a driver shortly after.  I think this is a MAJOR issue 
and needs to delt with !


----------



## StoneyBud (Aug 4, 2009)

chris1974 said:
			
		

> I know that if any company requires drug testing for employment THC levels are screened in those tests and if your levels exceed a certain number, it disqualifies you ! My father inlaw just recently lost his job of 15 years as a disposal truck driver for testing positive for MJ use. He has a script and has been a light recreational smoker since the early 70's ! I dont agree with his punishment at all ! He never used durring work hours and is a very responsible and productive person. The only good thing that was able to come from this, was they atleast gave him a good recomendation and he was able to find another job as a driver shortly after. I think this is a MAJOR issue
> and needs to delt with !


It's really not a "punishment", chris. It's another case of an employer covering their butts with an insurance company. Your Dad was driving a truck for them. I've never heard of a company that didn't require periodic drug testing of all drivers. I don't think one exists. In some insurance contracts it's phrased as "RANDOM Drug Testing", which SOME employers use as a way to get rid of what they consider problem employees that they are pretty sure smoke weed. It's not fair, it's not anything that anyone can prove, but it sure as hell exists.

Your Dad may have pissed off the wrong person somehow and got "Randomly" selected for a drug test. Random my butt.

Or, his number may have just come up. It's a chance all of us MJ users have on jobs that have possible periodic testing.

Again, it's an insurance game. A ratio of total employees have to be tested each year or month to keep within the requirements of most employers insurance contracts.

It sucks deep doo-doo when you're the one selected to fill that ratio.

I've been in the room with employers who made comments like "Mr. Smith is giving you problems? Well maybe he'll (wink-wink) get selected for random drug testing and be found to have a problem." I've heard that same type of thing said in several jobs I contracted into over the years.

I always thought, "man am I glad I don't work for that butthead."


----------



## tcbud (Aug 4, 2009)

I know people who do not smoke pot, because of their jobs and insurance, they would smoke but for that.  Such is Life.


----------



## chris1974 (Aug 4, 2009)

Stoney Bud... I have to tell you man, all of your replies and posts are more knowledgable, and make more sence than most (no offence to anyone else)  I always find myself agreeing on what you have to say, and feeling like I learned something as well.    You would have been an awesome prophesser to have had in school !    Anyway just thought I woud give you a pat on the back !  CHEERS


----------



## ArtVandolay (Aug 4, 2009)

:yeahthat:  Everything you said makes perfect sense, stoney.  I appreciate the time you took to type it out.



			
				Stoneybud said:
			
		

> 3. ... like jobs involving active flames, projectiles, crushing, lifting heavy objects, etc. will always involve drug testing for the same reason as #2 above.



Some people just can't stand to see other people have fun


----------



## cubby (Aug 4, 2009)

I own a medium size trucking company, I am obviously well aqainted with MJ and the difference between when using and not, but if you apply at my shop you will be required to take a drug test. If you're in an accident my insurer would'nt give two hoots if it's "medical" MJ or not, they would cancel my insurance and the department of transportation would pull my permits, thereby shutting my business.
As for people who keep saying "what you do on your own time....." To my knowledge there is no reliable way to tell if you smoked yesterday or two minuets before you got behind the wheel. So as a business owner I would never take the chance of having someone I even suspected of using as an employee. 
Just as an aside, if one of my drivers gets a DWI for booze, off duty, in his own personal car.....He's fired! To me this is a sure sign of lack of judgement, and I don't hire idiots.


----------



## umbra (Aug 4, 2009)

StoneyBud said:
			
		

> Hey Art, I have no idea how this one will play out, but there are several angles that have to be considered when thinking about employment in this case.
> 
> 1. If a person is using Medical MJ, they have a reason for that. If that reason is something like lower back pain, then their reason for using Medical MJ would disqualify them from jobs that require a strong, healthy lower back. They can't do one and have the other. "Oh it only hurts at night" probably won't cut it with a potential boss.
> 
> ...



I don't want to start an argument in which you call me names because you do not agree with me. But while this may be the case in some instances, this is not why testing exists. It exists because the fed gov will with hold funding, contracts, or any business to a company that does not do drug testing. So most companies go with the flow, because the feds will impact your bottom line if you do not follow suit. This was referred to as the Drug - Free Workplace act of 1988. This act REQUIRES all federal contractors to prohibit the unlawful use, distribution, manufacture, dispensation and/or possession of controlled substances. The current court cases in Cali deal with just these issues of "unlawful use" and "controlled substances".
But I do agree it is much easier to avoid the problem than it is to butt heads.


----------



## chris1974 (Aug 4, 2009)

I own a small construction company and both of my employees are stoners just like myself, they are awesome crpenters, safe,productive, punctual, and dependable guy's. I guess I lucked out being a residental builder my insurance
does not require me to drug test my guy's !  It just sucks that guys that smoke just like you and I are labled a risk, when I guarentee that you are just as responsible as I am, and we both know that no matter what ! ther will always be accidents !


----------



## ArtVandolay (Aug 4, 2009)

That was my sense of things when I started the thread, umbra, and why I asked about how MMJ and drug testing got along in MMJ states.  Stoney's response has the ring of truth to it to me, though.  And Cubby's response supports it.

And I have A CDL, too!  Guess I won't apply at Cubby's place .  And I'm a great driver, too .  Mostly because I always drive sober, I suppose.  There's no challenge when driving high


----------



## umbra (Aug 4, 2009)

ArtVandolay said:
			
		

> That was my sense of things when I started the thread, umbra, and why I asked about how MMJ and drug testing got along in MMJ states.  Stoney's response has the ring of truth to it to me, though.  And Cubby's response supports it.
> 
> And I have A CDL, too!  Guess I won't apply at Cubby's place .  And I'm a great driver, too .  Mostly because I always drive sober, I suppose.  There's no challenge when driving high



Cubby are you in a mmj state? If not then that will definitely make difference. Operating vehicles or equipment high is not a good idea, and can be an insurance risk. However there are plenty of jobs that have drug testing in which those issues are non existent. No insurance risk exists, yet they still test. I have worked for many companies in Cali, even though I do not live there. Many have changed their attitude. I have been drug tested for over 20 years.


----------



## cubby (Aug 4, 2009)

ArtVandolay said:
			
		

> That was my sense of things when I started the thread, umbra, and why I asked about how MMJ and drug testing got along in MMJ states. Stoney's response has the ring of truth to it to me, though. And Cubby's response supports it.
> 
> And I have A CDL, too! Guess I won't apply at Cubby's place . And I'm a great driver, too . Mostly because I always drive sober, I suppose. There's no challenge when driving high


 


I have lost more than a few really good drivers because of the federal regs. concerning MJ. My personal view is should be like alchohol, if your caught drivinng under the influence you pay the price be it loss of license, fines, or jail, just make it equal. I had an insurance ajuster tell me once that they would'nt want eqaul standards for MJ because no one can trust a "pot head" my only response "yeah, as opposed to all those trustworthy drunks". 
My drivers carry hazzardous materials, alchohol, and increasingly millitary equipment so there's not alot of wiggle room as far as the federal mandates go.
Like anything else in the world if you want the pay there are more hoops to jump through, and more bureucratic bull to contend with.
When I started driving you didn't need a CDL, security clearence, or drug test. You just needed to get your load from A to B on time and undamaged. For some reason Reagan thought drug testing was gonna' turn the industry into a sunday camp meeting. Nothings really changed. Just more aggrivation for the working man. This is life......


----------



## StoneyBud (Aug 4, 2009)

chris1974 said:
			
		

> Stoney Bud... I have to tell you man, all of your replies and posts are more knowledgable, and make more sence than most (no offence to anyone else) I always find myself agreeing on what you have to say, and feeling like I learned something as well. You would have been an awesome prophesser to have had in school ! Anyway just thought I woud give you a pat on the back ! CHEERS


Thanks chris, I stumble along and try to tell people ways to avoid falling into the same holes I've stepped into. Sometimes I say it correctly, sometimes I don't. I learn a lot here too. Some very, very knowledgeable people hang around this place!


----------



## cubby (Aug 4, 2009)

umbra said:
			
		

> Cubby are you in a mmj state? If not then that will definitely make difference. Operating vehicles or equipment high is not a good idea, and can be an insurance risk. However there are plenty of jobs that have drug testing in which those issues are non existent. No insurance risk exists, yet they still test. I have worked for many companies in Cali, even though I do not live there. Many have changed their attitude. I have been drug tested for over 20 years.


 


No I'm unfortunately not in a MMJ state, but I don't think it would make a difference in the trucking industry because we opperate primarily on federal highways so uncle sams rules overide state laws. My drivers run throughout the U.S. and Canada. Also, because drivers are traveling anytime from 10 days to a month they would be suseptable to laws such as interstate trafficking and if they got caught at the Canadian border going up or comming back that would be a international crime.
I would have to assume trucking, like law enforcement, commercial pilot, and other occupations that routinely cross state and national juristictions would not be permitted to use MMJ.
As far as other occupations that still test I would assume it's because of the stereotypical stoner/slacker immage. They believe that people who smoke, even if only on thier own time, would be bad for production numbers.


----------



## chris1974 (Aug 4, 2009)

No matter how we wanna look at it ! it just flat out sucks, and maybe one day things will be different for the better !


----------



## greenfriend (Aug 4, 2009)

Or find a job in the mmj industry or if ya got the huevos be an entrepreneur and start a mj business.  never kno, the job ad might go something like this...

HELP WANTED in MMJ business.  Job requirements: 1) Be a good smoker  2) Be a good grower


----------



## chris1974 (Aug 4, 2009)

Hahahahaha...... I Love It !


----------



## StoneyBud (Aug 4, 2009)

umbra said:
			
		

> I don't want to start an argument in which you call me names because you do not agree with me. But while this may be the case in some instances, this is not why testing exists. It exists because the fed gov will with hold funding, contracts, or any business to a company that does not do drug testing. So most companies go with the flow, because the feds will impact your bottom line if you do not follow suit. This was referred to as the Drug - Free Workplace act of 1988. This act REQUIRES all federal contractors to prohibit the unlawful use, distribution, manufacture, dispensation and/or possession of controlled substances. The current court cases in Cali deal with just these issues of "unlawful use" and "controlled substances".
> But I do agree it is much easier to avoid the problem than it is to butt heads.


I've never called anyone a name just because they didn't agree with me, umbra. I usually call people names after they've pissed me off for some reason.

I see what you're saying and agree with you in that both, what you've said and what I've said are true. Both reasons are major factors in why drug testing exists in the workplace.

In some cases, it makes sense. I really don't want *anyone* who has been drinking, smoking or sniffing anything to be driving my grandchildren to school. If no controls were in place at all, then I'm sure there would be tragic examples of why those controls should have been in place.

Sure, the gubmint uses it's full weight to require drug testing within those entities that come within it's purview. That's what gubmints do.

Even the "Dam" itself is now considering changes to it's up-to-now, lenient policies. Many affluent members of the senior Amsterdam lawmakers are considering a tougher stance against MJ.

The Bible belt of MJ has laws in place to restrict growing, far below what is considered to be the way of life in the Dam. How many plants, when and where they can be grown. How much weight of MJ can be on hand at any given moment within a tavern....

Sadly, the world as a whole is far behind where it should be in how it views marijuana usage. We have TWENTY THOUSAND members on this site that disagree mostly with those outdated views.

Slowly, but surely, we are changing public opinion of our Lady MJ.

We all *do* know that the gubmints will be the last to give in.


----------



## NorCalHal (Aug 4, 2009)

I am speaking for Cali, as I only know Cali laws well enough to input.

MMJ is not an exemption under California law for Emplee drug testing. Unfortunatly, thats it, end of story.

I forget the actual case, but it was an employee of AT&T and fought to save his job, and lost. That case set precedence in MMJ cases regarding employment.

I had a close friend who had to test after an accident at work, and had to test, regardless of his MMJ reccomendation. He lost his job after refusing a treatment program, impatient for a month!

I do not forsee MMJ making ANY headway into being exempt from Drug testing until it is reclassified Federally.

As Stoney said, the best way is to just quit for a month or so, then take your test. Most employers only test if an accident occurs that you are involved in. If you are at a company that does random, then you are going to get caught, sooner or later, or at least I would, and it would be real soon!


----------



## chris1974 (Aug 4, 2009)

StoneyBud said:
			
		

> I've never called anyone a name just because they didn't agree with me, umbra. I usually call people names after they've pissed me off for some reason.
> 
> I see what you're saying and agree with you in that both, what you've said and what I've said are true. Both reasons are major factors in why drug testing exists in the workplace.
> 
> ...


 


Once again Stoney Bud, I couldn't have said it better myself !


----------



## Budders Keeper (Aug 4, 2009)

I drove for a living until I retired...a company with gov. contracts as well as others. I guess my boss wasn't too smart, or _trusted_ my judgement. We were required to take a pre-employment test (I was already working there when it came about) and every year after that. Boss told me the same thing every time..."let me know when you can pass it". This was a requirement by the gov. agency we were contracted with. As far as insurance goes...if we didn't crash they didn't test us, but those that did wreck were bottled immediately.


----------



## chris1974 (Aug 4, 2009)

I doubt he was a dummy, good help is hard to find and some times you have to do the right thing for your employee as a person even if it does mean pulling the shades down a bit ! Good to hear that you didnt get fired for some bull **** like smoking a lill grass !


----------

