How do you feel about cannabis drug testing in the workforce?

31 comments

1. I’ve never actually seen a THC test for a job in the real world. Not sure how often or where this actually happens.

2. I think it’s a dumb waste of time

3. One reason the government is behind on cyber security is that they have trouble finding talented hackers who can pass a drug test.

   If someone can’t function because they are working under the influence that’s obvious and doesn’t need a test.

4. I don’t really care at all. Outside of federal jobs and the military it seems like it’s pretty rare anyway unless it’s a job where there is a good reason for it.

5. I’ve had to do urine drug screening tests for jobs that include THC on the drug panel. There are definitely some jobs that you should not be performing under any kind of impairment. The problem with THC drug testing is that the metabolites can stay in your urine for weeks. You may not even be using it on the job, but your tests for it may still come back positive, and you could still lose your job over it. I think it should be taken off random drug screening panels.

6. If your workplace is doing drug testing but not using a breathalyzer, it’s all virtue signaling.

   Your biggest threat by far is the quasi-functioning alcoholic who spends half the day laying low and sobering up.

7. I have been drug tested for every job I’ve had in my field and it’s extremely stupid.

8. People are absolutely sent home, suspended, and/or fired if they show up under the influence or smelling of alcohol.

   I’m in an interesting spot, as I work in HR. This whole issue is going to have to play out in the courts. Whether cannabis is legal or not isn’t an issue. The very simplified version of the law is that cannabis use is a choice, so employers absolutely have the legal right to not hire someone who uses it. There are employers who test for tobacco use and will deny employment based on that – totally legal. And tobacco is legal everywhere. Basically, people who use cannabis are not a protected class.

   Here’s where it gets interesting – cannabis has medical uses. It is illegal to discriminate based on a medical condition, unless that medical condition prohibits someone from safely doing their job – think not hiring a blind person to drive a truck. Someone is going to sue on the basis that it’s medical discrimination. We’ll just have to see how the courts rule. None of this will matter unless cannabis is legalized on a federal level, however.

   FWIW, I had to pass a pretty thorough drug test for my job. But I am a federal government contractor and have a security clearance.

9. Perfectly fine with it. Even if it was legal, a business should be able to test for such things if they feel it will impair the job enough.

10. I mean I’ve definitely seen people get sent to the testing lab that were drunk. I don’t have a problem with testing for weed for some jobs. There’s plenty of jobs where it’s largely pointless to drug test, but I’d prefer not to have the heavy equipment operator, who could kill me with a twitch, to be coming in under the influence.

11. It depends on the specific job.

    I think truck drivers, bus drivers, heavy equipment operators, etc. should be tested. And, should require negative test results.

    I would say the same for teachers, and caregivers for children, disabled, and elder peoples.

    Most other jobs, I’m ok with being a bit high on the job. As long as no lives are being placed at jeopardy, do what you have to do in order to get through the workday.

12. I suppose a business owner’s right to decide who they want to hire.

13. I don’t really think about it at all.

14. Um, in my company you’re absolutely not allowed to work under the influence of alcohol. I don’t know what the company procedure is if they suspect it, but I know at least one person has been fired for it. A couple drinks at lunch is not okay here unless you aren’t actually working the rest of the day.

    If your job has safety and judgment implications such that you need to be sober to do the job responsibly, then I think it’s totally fair to test for anything that would impair your abilities. Not whether you’ve ever done drugs but whether you’re intoxicated at the time.

15. If you mean a screening as part of a job application, that screening was a standard for many years. With legalization, that screening should be discontinued in the states where recreational has been legalized. Medical must be exempt.

    Use on the job though isn’t acceptable, just as use of alcohol on the job is not.

    There is a proposal for federal legalization that basically structures the administration of cannabis similar to alcohol. I think eventually they get a similar treatment.

16. The tests can be a bit inaccurate, I know that. THC takes a while to metabolize and can remain in your system long after you’re over its effects. That can be a bit concerning if you’re a light smoker. It’d be like sending someone home for the day because they had a few drinks a week before.

    I’m not against certain jobs denying days or employment for those obviously still under marijuana’s effect, though. At my printing press job I work around forklifts and with machines that could crush or break a limb if you’re not careful with them. We had a girl about six years ago come into work smelling like pot stick her hand into the paper stacker to fix the slightly jarred stack just as it spun and it broke two of her fingers. That machine could easily break your arm. She was let go a few months later after when she was caught smoking in her car during a break between papers.

    I know some people on Reddit are *adamant* that pot doesn’t impair their motor functions, but I’ve seen and experienced otherwise.

17. It’s a completely unacceptable and unnecessary overreach and should not be legal. If someone is bad at their job, discipline them for doing a bad job.

18. In my field, federal employment/contracts are very common, so even though cannabis is legal in my state, it is not legal for us. I don’t agree with it, and I think the federal government should just make it legal already, or at least have their rules follow the rules of the state the employee lives in.

    Another thing about drug testing is about how long it stays in your system. If you show up visibly drunk to work and got breathalyzed, it would show your intoxication level. For cannabis, if you got high a week ago and then had a random drug test, it may show up even though it isn’t affecting you currently.

19. If you are directly responsible for keeping other people alive then I agree with it. People like train engineers, truck drivers, pilots, preschool teachers, etc… need to be stone cold sober or someone is going to get hurt. But if you job is to enter data, push papers around, ring up groceries, etc… then it seems excessive unless it is interfering with your work.

20. >has a couple of drinks at lunch

    this would get most people fired almost immediately, no breathalyzers required.

    i don’t think *I* would get fired for it, but i would get in BIG trouble for it, like “we’ll let you stay employed while you find another job” kind of trouble.

21. It’s a wild over reach and should be against the law. All of the legalization movements accomplish nothing if it makes you unemployable, it may as well be Illegal.

22. In my experience testing is not used super stringently. I’m a field engineer, I am amongst heavy equipment and road works but obviously have no operating license beyond light vehicles, I occasionally use substances and have never been tested in Massachusetts (cannabis has been legal here the entire time I’ve been of age). I have coworkers who use way more and more often than I do. I worked a bit in Pennsylvania (this was in 2018 idk if it’s legal there yet) and was tested, so I think there’s a relation between legality and workplace testing, at least for pencil pushers.

    As to equipment operators, I know some who don’t use because of testing requirements related to their license. I know others who use anyway and their employers turn a blind eye. We are not currently in an economy where many businesses can afford to lose otherwise ideal workers who partake in a legal, commercially available substance.

23. THC testing should be allowed for jobs where safety is a factor. Construction, forklift, medicine, driver.

    I’ve had a few drinks at lunch and it’s not an issue (office job).

24. Needless and wasteful except where sobriety is a safety issue.

25. I think it is wrong. It’s as much of a drug as coffee but less of a drug than booze. I’m worried more about someone showing up to work drunk or high on something else like pills or meth. But it is federally illegal so only states can stop businesses from firing people for simply using it. It used to be legal federally.

26. It depends entirely on the job.

    And yes, breathalyzers can be administered if someone is suspected to be drunk at work. You can absolutely be fired for being drunk at work depending on the job.

27. Pro-use people should focus on funding better tests, because employers will absolutely test some people, and even if the test only proves you use, not that you’re high, many of them won’t take the risk.

28. As a consumer of the devil’s lettuce I’m staunchly against it

29. I deal with drug tests in my job and I think it’s BRUTALLY unfair that drug tests account for marijuana for 30 days or so because it’s stored in fat. You can do coke or meth and get drug screened (urine) the next week and pass. A much more dangerous addiction but it clears your system. I think a positive marijuana test should spark a serious discussion about addiction issues but not be disqualifying by itself.

30. My wife takes edibles a couple times a week for pain/sleep. She stopped but still tested positive on a test 5 weeks later.

31. Working in tech….uh, I don’t think any of my past few employers would *have* employees if they drug tested.

    Beer fridge in the office or drafts in the kitchen is so common as to be unremarkable, and many afternoon meetings (especially late afternoon or Friday) are held over beers “on the clock”.

    If you’re causing problems in the office, or not performing, that’d be a problem. Otherwise no one gives the slightest fuck what you do. I know one of the vacations a coworker takes every year is just to go out to an EDM festival and spend a couple days tripping on various substances. Pretty sure another is at least a little high 24/7. They’re both brilliant and do great work.