Wild74 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Medical marijuana could put employers in bindBoston Herald ^ | 2/10/14 | Priyanka Dayal McCluskey Posted on Monday, February 10, 2014 8:17:24 AM by raccoonradio The state’s new medical marijuana law will force hard choices on employers and workers — forcing some to fire medicinal pot users while others will have to make tough calls on whether employees’ drug use is interfering with their work. Public safety employers such as the Boston Fire Department say it won’t tolerate pot use, even as medication. “Boston Fire does conduct random drug and alcohol testing of its uniform force,” spokesman Steve MacDonald said. “Marijuana use is not allowed.” Meanwhile, Associated Industries of Massachusetts is advising businesses not to fire employees just for using medical marijuana, even if they fail drug tests — unless they come to work stoned. “The bottom line for the employer is that people cannot be impaired in the workplace,” AIM spokesman Chris Geehern said. “If an employer becomes aware an employee is using medical marijuana, that in and of itself is not grounds for taking any action. The break comes when that employee appears to be impaired in the workplace.” Massachusetts and 19 other states allow people with a range of medical conditions to use different forms of marijuana as treatment, but pot remains illegal under federal law. Signs of drug use in public transit workers, truckers and commercial pilots who are tested following accidents might also lead to their termination. “If you’re covered by federal DOT drug testing, that’s what holds,” Geehern said. Kabrina Krebel Chang, an employment law expert at Boston University’s School of Management, said even with the Bay State’s new medical marijuana law, employers maintain the right to fire a worker for failing a drug test. “If you’re an employee who medicates with marijuana, there are very few laws that protect you if you fail your company’s drug tests,” she said. Employers, she added, are reluctant to make exceptions to drug policies and won’t want to be responsible for checking whether their workers have authorization to use marijuana. Partners HealthCare, the largest private employer in Massachusetts, with 60,000 workers, has not yet decided how to deal with the issue of medical marijuana use among employees, said spokesman Rich Copp. “Partners HealthCare, like many other employers, is in the early stages of evaluating what changes may need to be made to existing HR policies. Any revisions to our policies will be made guided by appropriate statutes and with the best interests of our patients and our employees in mind,” Copp said. Geehern said, “We’re urging employers to take this on a case-by-case basis. This is all new. They should look at each case separately rather than blindly apply a policy.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild74 Posted February 10, 2014 Author Share Posted February 10, 2014 Hey man, I gotta go to work in a minute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 It won't put federal civilian employers and the military in a bind ... They have a zero tolerance stand backed up by federal laws and the UCMJ. Do the weed and you are gone ... period! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild74 Posted February 10, 2014 Author Share Posted February 10, 2014 More propaganda. You guys were probably allowed to go to work on your prescription hydro , correct? No one is saying smoke a joint on your lunch hour or break. No one is saying go to work on hydro either. Stay home! According to policy I had to report that I was prescribed the medication to my supervisor, which I thought was none of his business but that is company policy. Pain medication unless taken in a big dose is not like marijuana but both can make you relax. Best not to take any of it at work period. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild74 Posted February 10, 2014 Author Share Posted February 10, 2014 I can agree with you there. And I'm not suggesting anyone go to work stoned on marijuana, alcohol or prescription drugs. The guy that T-boned my van in '79 fell asleep at the wheel of his pickup. He was on doctor prescribed drugs and was not supposed to be driving. Almost if not all those prescriptions says not to operate machinery or drive, also if you are in that much pain best to stay at home and get over what is hurting you if you have to take that medicine unless it is chronic and then I don't know what you do, you can take low doses but it is still a narco and can relax you to much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immortal13 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 By what metric is an employer supposed to measure whether someone is impaired or not? This is really ridiculous. If you can't live your life without "medicinal" marijuana, then just keep your butt at home. I'm sure not going to hire any potheads and hope they don't decide to toke up before work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immortal13 Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 Putting medicinal marijuana and the various scenarios of the propagandists aside, what someone does in the privacy of his/her own home and on one's own time is no concern of the employer. I'm not going to hire people that hit the watering hole everyday after work and hope they don't show up to work the next day with a hangover. If you can't live your life without alcohol then just stay your butt home. How's that? I'm not talking about alcohol. Please try to keep up :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted February 10, 2014 Share Posted February 10, 2014 You tell 'em bully dog! Just stating the facts, which you can't seem to handle. The states can pass all the drug legalization laws they want. If you are a civilian or military employee working on a military installation in one of those states, those laws do not apply to you. I saw this play out first hand in Alaska. ..... and NO, they can't use it off base either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 Not everyone is a military bull dog retired or otherwise nor a member of MK-ULTRA currently or formerly though apparently forever. I did not see mention of military in the article. Different subject? No, it's not a different subject. It's just something pot-heads like you probably never thought about in your inebriated state of euphoria over these new state laws. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 If it's legalized in other states, it's going to create more unemployment and workman's comp insurance will be happy not to have to pay any claims that come in from pot smokers. Most well paying jobs require drug tests, and if one is hurt on the job they have to take a drug test. Even if the person tokes just occasionally it's in their system from between 10-50 days from what I've read. Depending on how much you drink alcohol can be out of your system in 6-7 hours with a BAC of .10 which is over the limit for a DWI. That's the main difference between alcohol and other drugs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 One thing for certain, it takes a dope to think like you. You are the pot-head ... not me :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 ^ The thing is tokers you refer are not stoned for 10-50 days. With your alcohol example you are saying a drinker could be legally impaired when reporting to work? I believe this happens more than people want to admit and certainly on that drive to work. Do well paying jobs allow this? Evidently. I remember the days of the three martini lunch, but that's not acceptable anymore, and hasn't been since the 70's. I'm simply stating the facts that THC can be found in a persons system for days and months, which could result in them not being employed and in many cases terminated for having the residual drug in their system. With the alcohol example, I am simply stating that alcohol is removed from the human body in hours not days or months. Is this hard for you to comprehend ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KirtFalcon Posted February 11, 2014 Share Posted February 11, 2014 :lol: No, you're more the pill head type. I'm clean :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 ^ No harder than you comprehending more people arrive at work impaired by alcohol ( hang over ) than marijuana. At least that is the case in my well paid environment. Prove otherwise. dave is ok with 20 year old young men having sex with 13 year olds. I'm ok with people relaxing with weed in the comfort of their own private homes. I didn't say I was okay with it, but I like Ted Nugent as a musician. I like Paul McCartney too, and he was busted for your favorite drug of choice. I don't think that Ted should be considered as a role model nor do I Sir Paul, but that's just how I see things with musicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immortal13 Posted February 12, 2014 Share Posted February 12, 2014 I'll ask again: by what metric are employers supposed to determine if an employee is high? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I'll ask again: by what metric are employers supposed to determine if an employee is high? Rambling/slurred/slow speech, bloodshot/droopy eyes, laughing/giggling too much, not able to concentrate, makes numerous mistakes, lack of short term or long term memory, and smell like they've been burning the most awful brush pile in the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild74 Posted February 13, 2014 Author Share Posted February 13, 2014 Rambling/slurred/slow speech, bloodshot/droopy eyes, laughing/giggling too much, not able to concentrate, makes numerous mistakes, lack of short term or long term memory, and smell like they've been burning the most awful brush pile in the world. As long as he is setting on his couch watching TV what does it matter... :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immortal13 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 Rambling/slurred/slow speech, bloodshot/droopy eyes, laughing/giggling too much, not able to concentrate, makes numerous mistakes, lack of short term or long term memory, and smell like they've been burning the most awful brush pile in the world. I don't think you understand the question Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rubberhammer Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I don't think you understand the question I don't know if there is one. A grown man of 200 lbs can smoke for 3 days straight and it'll be in his system for 7 days. Now on that 5th day of being smoke free, he'll still fail a drug test, but that doesn't mean he's high... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immortal13 Posted February 13, 2014 Share Posted February 13, 2014 I don't know if there is one. A grown man of 200 lbs can smoke for 3 days straight and it'll be in his system for 7 days. Now on that 5th day of being smoke free, he'll still fail a drug test, but that doesn't mean he's high... Yeah that's kind of my thought. So basically as an employer how would you prove the employee was "high" to avoid a lawsuit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wild74 Posted February 13, 2014 Author Share Posted February 13, 2014 Employees are free to test for drugs but if a product is legal then they in my view need to prove he is using that legal drug on the job there lays the problem with maijuanna it is in your system even after use for a period of time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 Yeah that's kind of my thought. So basically as an employer how would you prove the employee was "high" to avoid a lawsuit? You don't have to the precedent has already been set in workman's comp cases or be fired for testing positive. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2013/0425/Colorado-court-rules-marijuana-smokers-may-be-fired . You can file any lawsuit you want, but unless the laws are changed, you're out of a job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Immortal13 Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 You don't have to the precedent has already been set in workman's comp cases or be fired for testing positive. http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2013/0425/Colorado-court-rules-marijuana-smokers-may-be-fired . You can file any lawsuit you want, but unless the laws are changed, you're out of a job. Come on Dave, keep up with the discussion. I understand how it works now. What I'm asking is assuming marijuana is legal..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DaveTV1 Posted February 14, 2014 Share Posted February 14, 2014 Come on Dave, keep up with the discussion. I understand how it works now. What I'm asking is assuming marijuana is legal..... It's not yet, so the laws already cover that. I guess you didn't read where I wrote "unless the law is changed". The law hasn't been changed, so you can assume and make a hypothetical out of everything. This whole debate is beginning to sound like this : Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now