05-09-2005 20:42									#1
	Drug test question Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

An associate of mine is interviewing for a city job, and he had 2 questions I couldn't answer, so I pose them here:

For city, civil service-type positions, do they have to notify you during the interview if a drug test is required? Or indicate such a test in the job announcement itself?

Is it possible that they could spring the test during the interview? Or do they wait until you've been "hired"?

The position is in California, if that makes any difference.

Looking back at my various jobs (including working for several years at a Federal research laboratory, with access to nuclear reactors and particle accelerators), I realize I've never been drug tested, so I have no idea what the usual policies are.

	05-09-2005 20:55									#2
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

tell Cheech to put teh joint down

	05-09-2005 20:57									#3
	Tired of ads?

What does it matter, you don't do drugs so you don't need to know the answer to this NEXT ONE PLEASE and lock this thread quickly!

	05-09-2005 21:14									#4
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

In my experience the drug test is atually done during the hiring process. You are informed you have the job pending results of the routine drug screen. which i done the day you sign and fill out all of the paperwork accepting the position.

	05-09-2005 21:46									#5
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

What she said.

	05-09-2005 21:59									#6
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

It often depends upon the position. Transportation dirvers and machine operators have certain mandatory requirements, they have to have pre-employment testing and to be tested in a fixed frequency as well as for "cause". Other types of workers can be tested per the employer's policy. You can be tested pre-employment, periodically, randomly, and for "cause". It all depends upon the employer's policy. The employer is required to have a written policy in place and to not discriminate.

	05-09-2005 22:12									#7
	Suffering from ads?

Huh I was not aware that the employer was bounded by law to announce the drug test in the Job announcement. I always tought that that was done as a courtesy to those applying so to not waste anyones time such as if you cant pass a drug screen no need to apply. As the doc said they can test you at any time after hired. Most of the time it is done the day ur hired since most employers now days will not waste time or money to start to train you if you cant pass the drug test. Then they can do it at anytime of their choosing if they have policies stating they have random or cause drug testing in place.

	06-09-2005 03:04									#8
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Well

In North Carolina
(which in this case is NOT located in California)

I hire CDL positions 99% of the time.

A CDL (Commercial Driver Licence) requires "pre-employment drug screening.

In addition the following conditions permit & require drug screening

1) Post accident/incident screening

2) Semi-annual (DOT Physical every two years)

3) Random

4) Suspicion


These are all outlined in FMCSR standards.

By the way, we also do alcohol screening.

I would think an employer has every right to pre screen or screen after being hired without any grounds for the employee (prospective or current) to stand on as long as reasonable cause, such as outlined above, exists.


Why anyone would think any govt type of job wouldnt require what is considered a minimum requirement is suspect to me as a manager.

I would really stand back and take a hard look at any applicant that woiuld hold this as a bartering point

Gramps

	06-09-2005 03:06									#9
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by Dr Strangelove It often depends upon the position. Transportation dirvers and machine operators have certain mandatory requirements, they have to have pre-employment testing and to be tested in a fixed frequency as well as for "cause". Other types of workers can be tested per the employer's policy. You can be tested pre-employment, periodically, randomly, and for "cause". It all depends upon the employer's policy. The employer is required to have a written policy in place and to not discriminate.

almost like the Dr knew from experience

after my post I was rereading and saw his

we also require any workmans comp claim to have a drug screen done.


Gramps

	06-09-2005 03:14									#10
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

In Florida, the state gives companies that require drug screening a break on their unemployment insurnace. Consequently, a lot of jobs down here require it. Oh, I'm coding high!

	06-09-2005 03:20									#11
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara In Florida, the state gives companies that require drug screening a break on their unemployment insurnace. Consequently, a lot of jobs down here require it. Oh, I'm coding high!

as they should

not to get too far off topic, but if anyone knows anything about w/c modifiers it is uncontionable to not do everything whithin your power to keep that down.

drug screening helps because of the pitfalls of drug and alcohol abuse (injuries,lower work efficiencies,tardiness and missed days) and I speak from personal experience on both sides people.

	06-09-2005 03:24									#12
	Put an end to popups!

working junkies

	06-09-2005 05:47									#13
	Get a bigger avatar today!

Thanks for the info so far. FYI:

1) It's pot, nothing harder. Associate can quit if needed, but prefers pot as his relaxant of choice (as do I).

2) Position is white collar, non-medical or anything involving health/hazardous materials/etc.

3) Position is high-level supervisory sort of job.

As it stands now, my associate will begin abstaining so he is clean for any possible interview/pre-employment surprises, and until he finds out if the position will require regular or random testing.

And, no, it's not me. I prefer small-biz, non-testing type positions for myself. I like my herb.

	06-09-2005 05:57									#14
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by ajbera Thanks for the info so far. FYI: 1) It's pot, nothing harder. Associate can quit if needed, but prefers pot as his relaxant of choice (as do I). 2) Position is white collar, non-medical or anything involving health/hazardous materials/etc. 3) Position is high-level supervisory sort of job. As it stands now, my associate will begin abstaining so he is clean for any possible interview/pre-employment surprises, and until he finds out if the position will require regular or random testing. And, no, it's not me. I prefer small-biz, non-testing type positions for myself. I like my herb.

As earlier stated I am a past perfprmace enhancer/user what your word choice is is your choice.

Pot is much worse than people say, it fries the brain, causes signifigant lung damage (forget about the stuff they spray on it!)

Can quit if he wants..

That reminds me of Richard Pryor doing a standup after he was burned freebasing which is not smoking pot but the line he used was funny but sad.

He said "Man, I got a buddy who been snorting Coke for 20 years and he aint hooked!"

I am just sharing not judging or trying to run your life
When I was there my friend the last thing I was gonna do was tune into a lecture


So

I leave you with my former business advisors from the 70's

	06-09-2005 06:04									#15
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Grandpa Troll Pot is much worse than people say,

actually... it's a lot safer than the propaganda

quote: it fries the brain,

how? it does not kill brain cells... it simply releases THC into the brain which stimulates the brain's naturally occuring cannabinoid receptors, causing the "high"... the only significant effects of marijuana are short term memory disruption... and scientific testing on this is sketchy at best. I recently had a psych profile (which followed about a 4 month marijuana binge, not only did my IQ test above 150, my memory scores were around 130-140...)

quote: causes signifigant lung damage

in order to have lung damage, one would need to smoke a lot of pot... we're talking... probably in the amount of joints a cigarette smoker smokes cigarettes... most people smoke small amounts

quote: (forget about the stuff they spray on it!)

I grow my own, so I don't have to worry about that.

Alcohol is worse on the brain than marijuana. And my neurologist has shown me research that suggests cell phones may even be worse than marijuana.

So please stop spreading lies GT. Thanks.

	06-09-2005 06:11									#16
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Mrs. Tuberski Huh I was not aware that the employer was bounded by law to announce the drug test in the Job announcement. I always tought that that was done as a courtesy to those applying so to not waste anyones time such as if you cant pass a drug screen no need to apply. As the doc said they can test you at any time after hired. Most of the time it is done the day ur hired since most employers now days will not waste time or money to start to train you if you cant pass the drug test. Then they can do it at anytime of their choosing if they have policies stating they have random or cause drug testing in place.

They don't have to post it in the job announcement, it has to be posted in the job site. It is a state law but most states have it. For instance I work for a Best Buy in Toledo and we have all the labor laws, drug policies, workmans comp and what not posted in our break room.

	06-09-2005 06:12									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Dam Sava you have done your homework!! Well said. I cant say anything more then u just said, besides the fact that i dont grow or smoke the stuff

	06-09-2005 06:14									#18
	Got spare money?

Sava

ok your trying but it wont work because I am way ahead of you in this

It does cause medical problems not lies..well.lies are spread but by people trying to keep people using.

Oh I agree alcohol is bad as well

But not gonna let you use your own small experioence and the fact that you say it with conviction doesnt make it so

I didnt say either how much pot was going to do lung damage

But you support Pot by your statement so I wont talk to Sava wall about this.

By the way I did Pot,PCP,Crystal Meth,LSD,Crack and Coke and much heavier including alcohol..

so you wont think Im talking down to you or judging you but as a fellow former head, I see the light now

I did drugs and alcohol from 73-93..becauseI had a $h!tty life of abuse and pain and chose to mask my world with clouded dillusions..

Ok

Im out

	06-09-2005 06:27									#19
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

There is about 3x the tar in pot than in cigs, but pot is smoked in much smaller amounts. Pot being healthier than cigs and liqure isn't an impossible case to take on, but the lack of research on the effects of pot makes for a weak deffense.

	06-09-2005 08:37									#20
	Inflate your Upload Space

if the guy has or smokes pot depending how ofen dailey the drug takes bout 4 to 6 weeks to get out of ur system. coke is a lot quicker 72 hrs from the last hit usually

	06-09-2005 08:49									#21
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Grandpa Troll almost like the Dr knew from experience after my post I was rereading and saw his we also require any workmans comp claim to have a drug screen done. Gramps

Drug screening is mandated for CDL drivers, but not so much for secretaries, though many employers drug screen their office staff too. An accident would be considered "cause".

	06-09-2005 08:54									#22
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Grandpa Troll By the way I did Pot,PCP,Crystal Meth,LSD,Crack and Coke and much heavier including alcohol. ... I did drugs and alcohol from 73-93..becauseI had a $h!tty life of abuse and pain and chose to mask my world with clouded dillusions..

I once had a psychiatrist tell me that the drug abuser hates the life he's leading...but he does drugs because he hates reality more. It's sounds like you concur in his observation.

	06-09-2005 09:37									#23
	Got spare money?

GT: well I don't do drugs... I smoke marijuana

God's natural mood enhancer

I have no desire to do anything but marijuana.

	06-09-2005 10:03									#24
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Grandpa Troll as they should not to get too far off topic, but if anyone knows anything about w/c modifiers it is uncontionable to not do everything whithin your power to keep that down. drug screening helps because of the pitfalls of drug and alcohol abuse (injuries,lower work efficiencies,tardiness and missed days) and I speak from personal experience on both sides people.

To respond in drug test terms, this is a false positive.
Meth, heroin, cocaine, whatever, passes through the body and is gone natually in three (3) days.
No help required.
Marijuana, on the other hand, is present in the fatty tissue for up to months.
So what an employer, caught up in the trendy fashion of drug testing now has done, is passed over someone who may have smoked a minute amount months ago, and hired an addict of truly dangerous chemical substance.

Congratulations.

I still would contend pot is much preferred to be used in moderation over alcohol, to say nothing of the aforementioned chemicals.

	06-09-2005 11:05									#25
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by Sava actually... it's a lot safer than the propaganda

Both sides seriously misstate the effects of pot smoke.

quote: in order to have lung damage, one would need to smoke a lot of pot... we're talking... probably in the amount of joints a cigarette smoker smokes cigarettes... most people smoke small amounts

Pot smoke is significantly more dangerous than tobacco smoke. Between 3-5 joints per day is the equivalent of smoking a pack of cigarettes. While I never smoked that much, I have known poeople that smoke that much or more.

I have quit using pot. Not because of what the government says, nor even because of the hassle of drug testing, but simeply because, I don't enjoy being high anymore. I still like getting high, but you can't have one without the other. I'm not really keen on being drunk either. A little buzzed is okay.

I'm neither pro nor anti-drugs, though I think many people could stand to use drugs, and many could stand to stop using drugs. You, Sava, should quit pot. No one suffering depression should smoke the stuff. It only adds to the depression, even though it feels good.

	06-09-2005 14:21									#26
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara quote: Originally posted by Sava actually... it's a lot safer than the propaganda Both sides seriously misstate the effects of pot smoke. quote: in order to have lung damage, one would need to smoke a lot of pot... we're talking... probably in the amount of joints a cigarette smoker smokes cigarettes... most people smoke small amounts Pot smoke is significantly more dangerous than tobacco smoke. Between 3-5 joints per day is the equivalent of smoking a pack of cigarettes. While I never smoked that much, I have known poeople that smoke that much or more. I have quit using pot. Not because of what the government says, nor even because of the hassle of drug testing, but simeply because, I don't enjoy being high anymore. I still like getting high, but you can't have one without the other. I'm not really keen on being drunk either. A little buzzed is okay. I'm neither pro nor anti-drugs, though I think many people could stand to use drugs, and many could stand to stop using drugs. You, Sava, should quit pot. No one suffering depression should smoke the stuff. It only adds to the depression, even though it feels good.

I agree with almost everything above. I also find it amazing that with the huge amounts of pot consumed in this country every year that we don't know more about it. We can thank the war on drugs for this in large part. Since pot is illegal it is difficult or impossible for good scientific studies to be done on it. The government has done a marvelous job of discrediting itself on this issue by paying for numerous bogus studies / conclusions. In the meantime millions are using the stuff and have no clue how dangerous it might be. One of the ways it may be dangerous is that it causes a significant increase in heart rates almost immediately like cocaine, though with less intensity.

	06-09-2005 17:38									#27
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Pot smoke is significantly more dangerous than tobacco smoke.

which is why I use a vaporizer...

and still the point remains, more dangerous, yes... but much less of it is inhaled... so the overall risk is MUCH less.

a UCLA study concluded that because marijuana smokers inhale less smoke than tobacco smokers, marijuana is not linked to lung cancer: http://www.canorml.org/healthfacts/...lungcancer.html

quote: You, Sava, should quit pot. No one suffering depression should smoke the stuff. It only adds to the depression, even though it feels good

well, doc tells me otherwise...

according to my PET, I have overactive brain function (similar to epilepsy) in areas which causes me to have ADD like symptoms. MJ reduces these symptoms, regulates my mood, and helps me maintain a steady sleep cycle. It does not affect my depression at all. My first suicide attempt was a year before I had even tried marijuana. So go figure.

Where did you get your degree again?

sorry che, didn't mean to bust your balls

I appreciate your concern. But I'm a smart enough guy. I'm well aware of the positive things in my life and the negative things.

=

	06-09-2005 17:51									#28
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by Sava which is why I use a vaporizer...

Or, bake cookies.