| |||||||
| Register | FAQ | Gaming | VB Image Host | Search | Today's Posts | Mark Forums Read |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 |
| Banned Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 648
Grams: 8,716.40 Groans: 0
Groaned at 4 Times in 4 Posts
Thanks: 3
Thanked 32 Times in 27 Posts
| I wonder... if an employee is a valuable one and the employer knows a thing or two about weed, is it OK for them to let you stay if you test positive? Or is it against the law? What about actual hiring process... can they still take you if you test positive? I can't see HOW the hell weed can affect your job if you don't do before or on the job... |
| | |
| Marijuana.com Sponsor | |
Advertisement | |
| | #2 |
| May be habit forming ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 10,894
Grams: 19,427.37 Groans: 159
Groaned at 37 Times in 34 Posts
Thanks: 1,056
Thanked 1,783 Times in 953 Posts
| A major factor in coorperate drug testing is insurance. Manyu companies offer significant discounts to employers promising a drug-free workplace. If an employee is positive, and kept on the payroll, those significant discounts disappear. Most employers fin its much cheaper in the long run to fire the problem rather than pay more to be covered. Then theres the whole issue of workman's comp and whatnot. A hot (positive) test means workman's comp doesbn't have to pay in most situations, leavng you to pay for any incidents you may have on the job. AS for actual laws requiring dismissal for a positive test, that depends on a variety of things....government or private sector chief among them.
__________________ Remember you're a wreck, an accident forget the freak, you're just nature Keep the gun oiled and the temple clean shit, snort and blaspheme Let the heads cool and the engine run Because in the end, everything we do is just everything we've done..."Omega" by StoneSour http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Politic...ma#Gun_control www.sportsmenforObama.org |
| | |
| | #3 | |
| Banned Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 843
Grams: 4,690.65 Groans: 6
Groaned at 65 Times in 41 Posts
Thanks: 44
Thanked 131 Times in 115 Posts
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #4 |
| Banned Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 648
Grams: 8,716.40 Groans: 0
Groaned at 4 Times in 4 Posts
Thanks: 3
Thanked 32 Times in 27 Posts
| Could get like a contractual thing going where you get your own health insurance? Most companies offer crappy HMO that I would never even consider...PPO only! |
| | |
| | #5 |
| Sr. Member Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 900
Grams: 6,037.55 Groans: 0
Groaned at 11 Times in 3 Posts
Thanks: 18
Thanked 199 Times in 108 Posts
| I employ young men in a pot friendly environment and my insurance carrier requires me to test all new hires. I cannot accept Medical MJ use as an excuse, I need clean test results in my file. If a candidate is valuable to me, and fails the initial pre-employment test, I ask them to provide me clean test results within a week at their own expense. It is up to them to figure out how - *cough* substitution *cough* - but that is part of my plan; to see if they are any good at problem solving. When I receive the clean test results, I shred the prior results and hire the fellow.
__________________ In nature, stupidity is a capital crime; judgement is absolutely impartial, there is no process for an appeal, and the sentence is carried out immediately. |
| | |
| The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to BartSimpson For This Useful Post: | Tenderlungs (11-21-2007), ViktorStrangle (07-13-2008) |
| Marijuana.com Sponsor | |
Advertisement | |
| | #6 |
| Jr. Member Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 206
Grams: 2,161.06 Groans: 0
Groaned at 1 Time in 1 Post
Thanks: 10
Thanked 13 Times in 11 Posts
| Legitimately illegitimate How have you been bart? Nice to see your still here And its good to hear you're still a fair employer |
| | |
| | #7 |
| Banned Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 648
Grams: 8,716.40 Groans: 0
Groaned at 4 Times in 4 Posts
Thanks: 3
Thanked 32 Times in 27 Posts
| |
| | |
| | #8 |
| Sr. Member Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 900
Grams: 6,037.55 Groans: 0
Groaned at 11 Times in 3 Posts
Thanks: 18
Thanked 199 Times in 108 Posts
| It has nothing to do with legality, it has to do with the nature of my business and the insurance I am required to have. I do pre-employment drug screens because I must for insurance purposes, and a prospective employee is required to sign the drug-free workplace policy that I am required to adopt - by my insurance carrier. Of course I am not discussing certain professions that are required to be tested (Truck Driver's for example). |
| | |
| The Following User Says Thank You to BartSimpson For This Useful Post: | 1tokeovertheline (11-20-2007) |
| | #9 | |
| Banned Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 843
Grams: 4,690.65 Groans: 6
Groaned at 65 Times in 41 Posts
Thanks: 44
Thanked 131 Times in 115 Posts
| Quote:
| |
| | |
| | #10 | |
| Sr. Member Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 900
Grams: 6,037.55 Groans: 0
Groaned at 11 Times in 3 Posts
Thanks: 18
Thanked 199 Times in 108 Posts
| Quote:
You are seriously misinformed on employer liability. My liability was relieved when the employee signed the Drug/Alcohol-Free Workplace policy declaring that he/she would not use or be under the influence of such substances. Should that employee be tested positive following an accident as a result of medical treatment or criminal investigation, they have forfeited my insurance company's protection. I remain protected under my G/L policy, but the employee is left to wither on the vine. In my world, if my employee is busted, it is all on him to defend himself. Granted the defense mounted by my insurance is likely to protect the employee by default - but my insurance can also sue the employee. Secondly, the employment selection process is not that vulnerable to lawyers that my use of the second test results would ever be an issue. In the dozens of cases that I have dealt with this issue, I do not acknowledge the first test as valid and offer to consider a second test. The typical young man will always be sheepish, claim it was a mistake and agree to a second test. Granted this is done with a *wink wink*, but to tell the truth, this is the least of my worries. I have a number of other employment vulnerabilities that I lay awake at night worried about; sexual harassment, false accusations, theft, and bad catering keep me far more pro-active than an applicant's first drug test. But can I say something here - Viper420 - I tolerate pot. Only pot. I am absolutely known to despise meth-heads; even former meth-heads. They have certain mannerisms, ticks, behaviors and habits that are detectable long after use - and begin early in use. If the pre-employment test is positive, they tell me why - and my little program is only for MJ - I will never hire a meth-head. To generalize potheads, they know when they get a break and tend to honor it - the number of "wind-tests" conducted by LEO's across this country prove my point. I doubt that I suffer any significant exposure because I accept a pre-employment drug test from the applicant rather than my own vendor. Part of what I do here is to help the young men deal with the real world - men, if you fail the first test and are a strong candidate, offer a second test at your personal expense. And go read about substitution. | |
| | |
| Marijuana.com Sponsor | |
Advertisement | |