How would legalization of marijuana affect drug testing?

[Saint Nick]

Drug tests, especially random tests, still test for alcohol, something that stays in the body for hours. Other drugs have longer lifespans of three days to two weeks. THC, on the other hand, stays in the body for up to 30 days depending on how frequent of a user the party is.

How do you think it would affect drug testing? :whiste:

 

[xj0hnx]

It wouldn't?

 

[Dekasa]

Are you asking whether companies will care if you test positive for THC? Or are you asking if testing will actually become more frequent, still firing people who tested positive for THC?

For the first, I think many "drug-free workplaces" will still be upset if someone is smoking pot, there's quite a stigma associated with it, so even if they don't fire/warn you for it, if you turn in bad work, or don't do a good job, your boss might pickup on it quicker and toss you out for those, even if s/he wouldn't have without the testing/positive.

On the second, I don't really see a lot of people being fired or warned about THC if it comes up in their drug testing, though some positions or industries may still fire for it. Although the issue of shotty work coming down harder on you because of a stigma still stands.

 

[Moonbeam]

I think it would be a great idea if the people doing drug testing were stoned. I think it would strongly effect drug testing because everybody would be scored "what ever".

 

[HumblePie]

I think it would be a great idea if the people doing drug testing were stoned. I think it would strongly effect drug testing because everybody would be scored "what ever".

assuming they didn't eat the score card.

 

[Sclamoz]

If you boss thought you were smoking on the job they could get you tested and fired if the results came back positive. As for pre-employment screening I don't really know. I'm guessing people might stop caring over time but it will probably take a while to happen.

 

[Lemon law]

Every different drug has its chemical signatures, how long they stay detectable after use is another question. But if marijuana is legalized, we would simply cease testing for it. And illegal drug tests would become cheaper.

Do we test for aspirin, Viagra, or Tylenol, or midol?

 

[Saint Nick]

I am all for a drug free workplace and would never advocate smoking weed on the job. However, THC stays in the body even after the effects of the drug are long gone.

 

[BoomerD]

Here in Kahleeforneeya, having a "medical marijuana card" doesn't get you a pass on drug testing. If your job requires you to be drug-free...you must be drug-free...regardless of any prescription for pot.

I doubt that any of that will change should pot become legalized. It's usually still a termination offense to be at work under the influence of alcohol...why would being under the influence of marijuana be any less a termination offense? (Plus...keep in mind, with current drug testing, pot stays in your system at detectable levels for up to 30 days...more with some tests)

Even though I've long advocated the legalization and taxation of marijuana, (tax it and sell it in controlled environments such as liquor stores) until they come up with a quick drug test that can differentiate between the joint you smoked last weekend in the comfort of your living room and the joint you smoked as you smoked 15 minutes ago...legalization will be iffy at best...otherwise, folks are gonna get DUI tickets for the pot they smoked several days prior.

 

[XZeroII]

Even if it were legalized, I would never hire someone who tested positive for THC. Due to the nature of the drug, you are almost guaranteed to not be as effective as a non-user. Note the word "almost" in that last sentence.

 

[woolfe9999]

Here in Kahleeforneeya, having a "medical marijuana card" doesn't get you a pass on drug testing. If your job requires you to be drug-free...you must be drug-free...regardless of any prescription for pot.

I doubt that any of that will change should pot become legalized. It's usually still a termination offense to be at work under the influence of alcohol...why would being under the influence of marijuana be any less a termination offense? (Plus...keep in mind, with current drug testing, pot stays in your system at detectable levels for up to 30 days...more with some tests)

Even though I've long advocated the legalization and taxation of marijuana, (tax it and sell it in controlled environments such as liquor stores) until they come up with a quick drug test that can differentiate between the joint you smoked last weekend in the comfort of your living room and the joint you smoked as you smoked 15 minutes ago...legalization will be iffy at best...otherwise, folks are gonna get DUI tickets for the pot they smoked several days prior.

I thought the tests could differentiate by level an actively intoxicated consumer from one who had residual from prior intoxiation. If that is not the case, they could never convict anyone for driving under the influence of pot, because there would always be reasonable doubt as to whether they were intoxicated at the time. Yet people do get convicted for it.

- wolf

 

[xj0hnx]

I thought the tests could differentiate by level an actively intoxicated consumer from one who had residual from prior intoxiation. If that is not the case, they could never convict anyone for driving under the influence of pot, because there would always be reasonable doubt as to whether they were intoxicated at the time. Yet people do get convicted for it.

- wolf

I'd imagine a test that specific would be pretty cost prohibitive for the general public. I wonder how long it stays in the blood, if it is still able to be detected for a period after it's metabolized and crossed the blood brain barrier than in certain circumstance that may be a better way to test for it.

 

[hal2kilo]

I am all for a drug free workplace and would never advocate smoking weed on the job. However, THC stays in the body even after the effects of the drug are long gone.

Ding! Ding! Also, how would you test for intoxication levels when suspected of a DUI during a traffic stop.

Seems like standardized reaction testing using some sort of device is the only legitimate way for testing DUI. Of course, people would probably end up getting DUI due to lack of sleep, being old, you name it.

 

[Jhhnn]

Only when and if a non-invasive test for actual thc content of one's bloodstream vs residual breakdown products in urine becomes available will things change at all. Otherwise, pot smokers would necessarily be required to submit to blood tests, currently the only testing that can accomplish that differentiation... pot smokers might even go for that if it were a pinprick test vs the current blood draw method... and if it was illegal to discriminate against pot smokers who aren't stoned at work...

"Hey- I'm a pot smoker, so you'll want the pinprick test, too, ya prick..."

Preaching against sin isn't very effective if there aren't suffering sinners, so suffering must be artificially induced if necessary... Drug testing in a nutshell...

 

[rudder]

If you are a pilot and you test positive... you lose your job.

Alcohol is legal... if you fly a plane within 8 hours of taking a drink... you can be in deep doo doo. Most airlines have stricter policies.

Safety sensitive jobs will be no different in regards to pot smoking.

 

[Jadow]

The companies that test would just change their panel, start testing for ecstasy or oxy in place of THC.

People in safety sensitive positions or DOT drivers, FAA, etc.. would still need to steer clear of THC

 

[ZzZGuy]

If you are a pilot and you test positive... you lose your job.

Alcohol is legal... if you fly a plane within 8 hours of taking a drink... you can be in deep doo doo. Most airlines have stricter policies.

Safety sensitive jobs will be no different in regards to pot smoking.

Pretty much this.

If no cheap & reliable way is found to detect if you are impaired by marijuana, not just that you used it in the past month, then there will simply be a zero tolerance policy for safety critical jobs.

You want X job with zero tolerance policies, you don't smoke weed within 30 days of setting foot on the job site.

 

[hal2kilo]

The companies that test would just change their panel, start testing for ecstasy or oxy in place of THC.

People in safety sensitive positions or DOT drivers, FAA, etc.. would still need to steer clear of THC

They've been testing for opiates, synthetic or not for years. Oxycotin is a synthetic opiate.

 

[xj0hnx]

They've been testing for opiates, synthetic or not for years. Oxycotin is a synthetic opiate.

It's actually a semi-synthetic

 

[hal2kilo]

Pretty much this.

If no cheap & reliable way is found to detect if you are impaired by marijuana, not just that you used it in the past month, then there will simply be a zero tolerance policy for safety critical jobs.

You want X job with zero tolerance policies, you don't smoke weed within 30 days of setting foot on the job site.

30 days is not even enough for some peoples metabolism.

 

[IGBT]

zero tolerance drug testing would still be enforced for drugs and alcohol. No escape for the druggies and drunks.