Once it got to a federal court the employer would win... That is essentially what the CO supreme court was saying.
DISH wins a court battle (at least for now)
- Thread starter Peter Parker
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 73
- Views 8K
Once it got to a federal court the employer would win... That is essentially what the CO supreme court was saying.
But who am I to believe? An eyewitness or some random stranger on the internet?
the chat i was talking about went from what apeared to be a flippant discussion of drugs with charlies comment who doesnt have a source?
the discussions here said the chat ended suddenly going immediately to a old movie.
as i said i had cancelled by then, so i didnt see that chat or any that may of occured later.
i know i didnt dream this, who else remembers it?
the discussions here said the chat ended suddenly going immediately to a old movie.
as i said i had cancelled by then, so i didnt see that chat or any that may of occured later.
i know i didnt dream this, who else remembers it?
Although I do not support medical marijuana this is wrong.
As long as the employee is not smoking it at work, and it's legal where he lives it should not effect his job.
As long as the employee is not smoking it at work, and it's legal where he lives it should not effect his job.
Could you clarify this? Seems self contradictory.
"Pot" has been shown to have medical benefits.
The federal government has been lying to us on this topic for years. To the detriment of many, including children.
It is FAR less harmful than alcohol.
And I'm not a user. But when legal, I'll buy a cookie or a brownie or such. And I wait only because I have too much to lose.
There are a myriad of problems with this:
- There are not even theories about how this might be done and many concluding that it can't
- Intoxication testing is by no means a "quick" process as it has to evaluate cognitive and motor skills against an established baseline
- By the time someone calls for a test, there's a good chance that there has already been an "accident"
There are a couple of side effects as well.
You would be hard pressed to find data suggesting that active marijuana use doesn't negatively impact multiple metrics of performance.
There are currently tests that test for THC currently in the system. That is what should be used, as you can be legally sober at work, and still get fired for drinking on the job. I would be ok with that, but whatever I do after work is my business, especially if it is medicinal. If an employer feels my work value has gone down, he can let me go based on performance only, not for the medicine I choose to take.
- If hundreds of police agencies are about to have money to spend on testing kits, companies will want to find a way to quick check the levels. You can blow into a breathalyzer and have you blood alcohol level screened. Is it impossible? We'll see.
- intoxication testing would need to be no more rigorous than that for alcohol. That level of screening already exists and would need no additional resources.
- or if someone has been pulled over for poor driving... like alcohol.
Until such time as a test with high confidence has been devised it is a moot point.
How do you justify such a test? Do you observe that the employee isn't performing? Breathalyzer tests must typically be accompanied by a field sobriety test. It isn't just pass or fail on blowing toxic.
The level of training required to perform such a test will have to wait until a test is developed.
How do you measure impaired on-the-job performance? Finding someone with the classic signs of alcohol intoxication is much easier to judge than whether an employee is stoned, bored or just not motivated.
You seem to be going the long way towards agreeing with me.
Some states require random drug testing. And I'm also talking about general sobriety testing for drivers.
No. The tests for the marijuana will show positive for weeks. The THC tests currently employed will not have a false positive after 12 hours which is approx how long the psychoactive drug stays in your system.
In that marijuana intoxication cannot currently be reliably tested, we're on different planets.
You're making up conditions. Several states support mass sobriety checks. I don't think any require testing (random or otherwise) other than for specific positions and those on welfare.
Other than for gubmint employees, random testing may or may not be allowed and manadatory testing is only allowed in the event of an accident or obvious impairment.
http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/employee-rights-book/chapter5-3.html
One way or another, companies need to be able to protect themselves from the liability associated with not doing everything they can to prevent accidents.
