It's that time of year again...

[AFK]

First,

THERE ARE NO LINGERING EFFECTS FROM ALCOHOL.

See reply #540

Second, your question was an avoidance of mine, and while maybe pertinent to the larger conversation, is a deliberate avoidance of our particular angle.

Y'dingus.

You've been ignoring from the start the fact that marijuana is an impairing substance, with regards to workplace safety (aka people not being impaired and turning people into jelly with heavy machinery) and the legal status is a moot point.  I've tried like 3 different ways to get you to acknowledge it but you refuse to even address the point. 

[The Good Reverend Roger]

First,

THERE ARE NO LINGERING EFFECTS FROM ALCOHOL.

See reply #540

Great.  So you agree that if any evidence of alcohol use is found by any test, for any length of time preceding the test that can be established, the employer may terminate the employee for that alone?

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

UNNNNGGGGG!  Legalization doesn't change the fact that marijuana is an impairing substance, employers will continue to not want to have impaired employees so they will continue to test.  This is pretty straightforward.

Positive MJ test is not proof of impairment.

Are employers risk averse?

Maybe a few. If they all were, there would be no need for OSHA.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

UNNNNGGGGG!  Legalization doesn't change the fact that marijuana is an impairing substance, employers will continue to not want to have impaired employees so they will continue to test.  This is pretty straightforward.

Positive MJ test is not proof of impairment.

Are employers risk averse?

Maybe a few. If they all were, there would be no need for OSHA.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

First,

THERE ARE NO LINGERING EFFECTS FROM ALCOHOL.

See reply #540

Great.  So you agree that if any evidence of alcohol use is found by any test, for any length of time preceding the test that can be established, the employer may terminate the employee for that alone?

DRINK ON FRIDAY NIGHT, GET FIRED ON MONDAY MORNING! UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS ARE IN THE BAG, WAHOO!

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

UNNNNGGGGG!  Legalization doesn't change the fact that marijuana is an impairing substance, employers will continue to not want to have impaired employees so they will continue to test.  This is pretty straightforward.

Positive MJ test is not proof of impairment.

Are employers risk averse?

Maybe a few. If they all were, there would be no need for OSHA.

 

[AFK]

It wouldn't happen that way in the real world.  In the real world, it would be a positive test along with behavior that deems the employee unfit for duty.  Now, I also happen to believe that workplaces should have substance abuse policies that are supportive, not just punitive.  Anyone can fuck up, if someone pops positive, get them to EAP and link them up with resources and get them some help.  I don't think employers SHOULD fire them on the spot, but the law says they can.


I also know that employers are risk averse and can understand why they would want to terminate someone who is coming to work positive for drugs.  That is a potential workplace safety issue that can be VERY costly.


My dad is a safety director for a large employer so I have a bit of a window into these issues.

[Junkenstein]

UNNNNGGGGG!  Legalization doesn't change the fact that marijuana is an impairing substance, employers will continue to not want to have impaired employees so they will continue to test.  This is pretty straightforward.

Positive MJ test is not proof of impairment.

Are employers risk averse?

Maybe a few. If they all were, there would be no need for OSHA.

Aha

AHAHAHAHAHAA. 5 stars, proceed directly to free parking and collect kudos.

[Junkenstein]

First,

THERE ARE NO LINGERING EFFECTS FROM ALCOHOL.

See reply #540

Great.  So you agree that if any evidence of alcohol use is found by any test, for any length of time preceding the test that can be established, the employer may terminate the employee for that alone?

DRINK ON FRIDAY NIGHT, GET FIRED ON MONDAY MORNING! UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS ARE IN THE BAG, WAHOO!

LIVE LIKE A KING UNDER AUSTERITY. FOREVER.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

It wouldn't happen that way in the real world.  In the real world, it would be a positive test along with behavior that deems the employee unfit for duty.

Just like how the real world does it with weed.   

[LMNO]

You've been ignoring from the start the fact that marijuana is an impairing substance, with regards to workplace safety (aka people not being impaired and turning people into jelly with heavy machinery) and the legal status is a moot point.  I've tried like 3 different ways to get you to acknowledge it but you refuse to even address the point.

I'm sorry?  I completely admit that MJ is imparing, when you're high.  Your posts make you appear to think that if you show up positive on a pee test for pot, you're high.

What you're ignoring is that the test is not an accurate measurement of impairment.


WHICH IS MY ENTIRE POINT RIGHT NOW.

[AFK]

UNNNNGGGGG!  Legalization doesn't change the fact that marijuana is an impairing substance, employers will continue to not want to have impaired employees so they will continue to test.  This is pretty straightforward.

Positive MJ test is not proof of impairment.

Are employers risk averse?

Maybe a few. If they all were, there would be no need for OSHA.

No, most of them, which is why they all have lawyers.


Dumbass.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

UNNNNGGGGG!  Legalization doesn't change the fact that marijuana is an impairing substance, employers will continue to not want to have impaired employees so they will continue to test.  This is pretty straightforward.

Positive MJ test is not proof of impairment.

Are employers risk averse?

Maybe a few. If they all were, there would be no need for OSHA.

No, most of them, which is why they all have lawyers.


Dumbass.

RWHN rage is fucking awesome.  Stella just owned the FUCK out of him.  Watch the froth.

[Junkenstein]

It wouldn't happen that way in the real world.  In the real world, it would be a positive test along with behavior that deems the employee unfit for duty.  Now, I also happen to believe that workplaces should have substance abuse policies that are supportive, not just punitive.  Anyone can fuck up, if someone pops positive, get them to EAP and link them up with resources and get them some help.  I don't think employers SHOULD fire them on the spot, but the law says they can.


I also know that employers are risk averse and can understand why they would want to terminate someone who is coming to work positive for drugs.  That is a potential workplace safety issue that can be VERY costly.


My dad is a safety director for a large employer so I have a bit of a window into these issues.

You have fuck all idea about these issues. All you have, as always is a shitty appeal to authority. This time "DADDY SAYS".

Blithering fucking cretin. I bet you wear Velcro shoes with that suit.

[AFK]

UNNNNGGGGG!  Legalization doesn't change the fact that marijuana is an impairing substance, employers will continue to not want to have impaired employees so they will continue to test.  This is pretty straightforward.

Positive MJ test is not proof of impairment.

Are employers risk averse?

Maybe a few. If they all were, there would be no need for OSHA.

No, most of them, which is why they all have lawyers.


Dumbass.

RWHN rage is fucking awesome.  Stella just owned the FUCK out of him.  Watch the froth.

Right, the lawyers are just around for kicks, not to advise them on how to not to be on the hook and losing tons of money.  It's the blind leading the blind at PD.COM