Potheads beware...

[ba1614]

Your want for that buzz, even if your state says it is 'ok', can still get you fired...

Colorado Court: Pot smokers can be fired - UPI.com

IMHO, this is a good ruling... As an employer, you don't want people who engage in illegal activity or who are potheads... as an employer, if you don't want employees who choose to engage in detrimental activities, that is a right you should have

We agree on almost everything DiamondDave, but I'm going to disagree on this one, and as an employer who's smoked the mighty herb for over 30yrs, I'm glad I don't have to answer to anyone.
A right I should have is the right to grow and smoke my own herb as I grow old and harmless. Trafficking is another story all together.

I'm in construction, and don't care what my employees do on their time, as long as they are sober and ready to work when they arrive for their work day, and don't partake during the work day. The only fella I've had to send home was because of alcohol.

 

[DiamondDave]

That really troubling and giving employers too much power.

That is plain idiotic... You do not get to FORCE the employer.. they have the freedom to discriminate on actions and choices just as you have the freedom not to work for an employer who may seem too strict for your tastes...

You can see why this is troubling no? If not that's fine but I'll know that you don't think ahead of whats in front of you

No.. it is NOT disturbing.. we discriminate against the behavior of others ALL THE TIME.. and rightfully so... we choose not to allow foul mouthed people around our kids.. we choose not to have the stinky guy talk to the customer.. we choose not to rent our basement room to the convicted criminal...


To think otherwise is lunacy

 

[DiamondDave]

Your want for that buzz, even if your state says it is 'ok', can still get you fired...

Colorado Court: Pot smokers can be fired - UPI.com

IMHO, this is a good ruling... As an employer, you don't want people who engage in illegal activity or who are potheads... as an employer, if you don't want employees who choose to engage in detrimental activities, that is a right you should have

We agree on almost everything DiamondDave, but I'm going to disagree on this one, and as an employer who's smoked the mighty herb for over 30yrs, I'm glad I don't have to answer to anyone.
A right I should have is the right to grow and smoke my own herb as I grow old and harmless. Trafficking is another story all together.

I'm in construction, and don't care what my employees do on their time, as long as they are sober and ready to work when they arrive for their work day, and don't partake during the work day. The only fella I've had to send home was because of alcohol.

You have the freedom to act that way... whether I agree or not... that is your choice (or non choice) to discriminate on that action/behavior... and I would not take that freedom away from you, just as I hope you would not take it away from me

 

[ClosedCaption]

That is plain idiotic... You do not get to FORCE the employer.. they have the freedom to discriminate on actions and choices just as you have the freedom not to work for an employer who may seem too strict for your tastes...

You can see why this is troubling no? If not that's fine but I'll know that you don't think ahead of whats in front of you

No.. it is NOT disturbing.. we discriminate against the behavior of others ALL THE TIME.. and rightfully so... we choose not to allow foul mouthed people around our kids.. we choose not to have the stinky guy talk to the customer.. we choose not to rent our basement room to the convicted criminal...


To think otherwise is lunacy

But Dave those are all things that are happening i.e. Someone being Foul mouthed not being foul mouthed at home or stinky guy right now...not because that guy stinks when hes at home.

I'm not understanding why or how you can say that something someone does, off the clock, harming no one affects anyone especially an employer.

Show up drunk, of course your ass is canned. Show up high, same thing. At home though?

 

[NoNukes]

Your want for that buzz, even if your state says it is 'ok', can still get you fired...

Colorado Court: Pot smokers can be fired - UPI.com

IMHO, this is a good ruling... As an employer, you don't want people who engage in illegal activity or who are potheads... as an employer, if you don't want employees who choose to engage in detrimental activities, that is a right you should have

Illegal activity understood. Potheads tho? How is weed detrimental? I'm guessing this "detrimental activity" outrage only extends to weed and not scripts and alcohol, correct?

We have the right to discriminate against choices...

Does a church want to hire someone that actively protests against the church on their off time?? Do you want someone with a huge gambling problem handling your cash or accounts??

IMHO, this is no different if you don't want a pothead working for you

It is totally different. Would you want a known pedophile babysitting for your kids? How ridiculously far are you going to take this?

 

[NoNukes]

Your want for that buzz, even if your state says it is 'ok', can still get you fired...

Colorado Court: Pot smokers can be fired - UPI.com

IMHO, this is a good ruling... As an employer, you don't want people who engage in illegal activity or who are potheads... as an employer, if you don't want employees who choose to engage in detrimental activities, that is a right you should have

So whats the point of legalizing the Ganja if it gets you fired?

Everyone does not have a job where they can be persecuted.

 

[NoNukes]

If they fail a drug test, I don't have an issue with an employer having the right to fire them, as long as its not prescribed for a specific medical condition.

If pot is legal there, you have a problem with people smoking a joint in their time off? On weekends? On vacation?

 

[NoNukes]

It's an idiotic ruling. Can I fire someone if they had a few beers in their off time? Can I fire someone if they're on medication for depression?

What people do in their time off is none of the concern of they're employer. If they're performance slips then fire them for that. But it's idiotic to fire someone just for having residue of a legal substance in their body.

Not at all an idiotic ruling. What people do in their time is none of my concern. If that employee is driving a company truck, has THC or alcohol in their system and causes a wreck, my company becomes liable. The company has a no tolerance policy.

THC stays in your system for months.

 

[paulitician]

The line separating Private life & Business life, is being erased. This has to happen in order to achieve maximum worker-productivity and profit. The Government/Corporations do want to own you. Sadly, that is the reality.

 

[Katzndogz]

Your want for that buzz, even if your state says it is 'ok', can still get you fired...

Colorado Court: Pot smokers can be fired - UPI.com

IMHO, this is a good ruling... As an employer, you don't want people who engage in illegal activity or who are potheads... as an employer, if you don't want employees who choose to engage in detrimental activities, that is a right you should have

Sure..as long as I can fire people who don't get stoned, or who do any other legal thing that I personally don't approve of.

You know...like talk with a Southern accept or wear a cross or own a gun, or whatEVER I personally think is detrimental/.

That's the way it should be. If you don't want someone with an accent, you should not be forced to hire one. If you don't want someone who owns a gun, or wears a cross, or is gay, or anything else you don't like, there should be no law saying you have to.

 

[DiamondDave]

You can see why this is troubling no? If not that's fine but I'll know that you don't think ahead of whats in front of you

No.. it is NOT disturbing.. we discriminate against the behavior of others ALL THE TIME.. and rightfully so... we choose not to allow foul mouthed people around our kids.. we choose not to have the stinky guy talk to the customer.. we choose not to rent our basement room to the convicted criminal...


To think otherwise is lunacy

But Dave those are all things that are happening i.e. Someone being Foul mouthed not being foul mouthed at home or stinky guy right now...not because that guy stinks when hes at home.

I'm not understanding why or how you can say that something someone does, off the clock, harming no one affects anyone especially an employer.

Show up drunk, of course your ass is canned. Show up high, same thing. At home though?

Things off the clock can effect your business on the clock.... as stated before.. you want the pierced and tattooed atheist working at your bible store, even if they seem courteous?? No... probably not

You can discriminate against lifestyle choices, and it is completely ok... it is your lifestyle choice to do so.. and you can live with the consequences to your business because of it...

I personally do not want or trust those who do certain behaviors in my work place.. and those standards may or may not be different than yours.. but it is my freedom as a person responsible for my business.. and you have the freedom to not work for me, to boycott me, or whatever else as a result of my choice

 

[NoNukes]

It's an idiotic ruling. Can I fire someone if they had a few beers in their off time? Can I fire someone if they're on medication for depression?

What people do in their time off is none of the concern of they're employer. If they're performance slips then fire them for that. But it's idiotic to fire someone just for having residue of a legal substance in their body.

So you think it's ok for a guy to operate a crane or a train when he's high?

I drove trains high when I worked for the railroad in my 20s. Hell, some of the engineers were stone drunks, they were the dangerous ones.

 

[ba1614]

Your want for that buzz, even if your state says it is 'ok', can still get you fired...

Colorado Court: Pot smokers can be fired - UPI.com

IMHO, this is a good ruling... As an employer, you don't want people who engage in illegal activity or who are potheads... as an employer, if you don't want employees who choose to engage in detrimental activities, that is a right you should have

We agree on almost everything DiamondDave, but I'm going to disagree on this one, and as an employer who's smoked the mighty herb for over 30yrs, I'm glad I don't have to answer to anyone.
A right I should have is the right to grow and smoke my own herb as I grow old and harmless. Trafficking is another story all together.

I'm in construction, and don't care what my employees do on their time, as long as they are sober and ready to work when they arrive for their work day, and don't partake during the work day. The only fella I've had to send home was because of alcohol.

You have the freedom to act that way... whether I agree or not... that is your choice (or non choice) to discriminate on that action/behavior... and I would not take that freedom away from you, just as I hope you would not take it away from me

Nope, I sure wouldn't. You should be free to hire whoever you want, and if they don't like the piss test they are free to go elsewhere to work.

 

[ClosedCaption]

No.. it is NOT disturbing.. we discriminate against the behavior of others ALL THE TIME.. and rightfully so... we choose not to allow foul mouthed people around our kids.. we choose not to have the stinky guy talk to the customer.. we choose not to rent our basement room to the convicted criminal...


To think otherwise is lunacy

But Dave those are all things that are happening i.e. Someone being Foul mouthed not being foul mouthed at home or stinky guy right now...not because that guy stinks when hes at home.

I'm not understanding why or how you can say that something someone does, off the clock, harming no one affects anyone especially an employer.

Show up drunk, of course your ass is canned. Show up high, same thing. At home though?

Things off the clock can effect your business on the clock.... as stated before.. you want the pierced and tattooed atheist working at your bible store, even if they seem courteous?? No... probably not

Can doesn't mean will...And again, an atheist working at a bible store probably wont happen anyway since were talking about religion. Now if were talking about silly beliefs in no basis in reality then that is a good example comparing a bible store to someone smoking weed off the clock and believing that's "bad"

You can discriminate against lifestyle choices, and it is completely ok... it is your lifestyle choice to do so.. and you can live with the consequences to your business because of it...

To a certain extent tho...You cant discriminate against the law and if you do you broke the law...Still not seeing why smoking off the clock will effect anyone's job function

I personally do not want or trust those who do certain behaviors in my work place.. and those standards may or may not be different than yours.. but it is my freedom as a person responsible for my business.. and you have the freedom to not work for me, to boycott me, or whatever else as a result of my choice

smh

 

[DiamondDave]

If they fail a drug test, I don't have an issue with an employer having the right to fire them, as long as its not prescribed for a specific medical condition.

If pot is legal there, you have a problem with people smoking a joint in their time off? On weekends? On vacation?

But it is still against the law of the land... it is still against federal law...

There may not be a law specifically against disturbing a bald eagle nest in your state, but there is a federal law that trumps it... it is, in effect, still against the law... you may indeed pass a law saying it is legal in your town to have sex with a beagle, but your state may still have a law saying otherwise... your local law does not negate the state law

I personally do have a problem with people using illegal drugs for recreational use.. it just so coincides my stance is in line with law.. but if I did disagree, my personal choice does not negate the law, even if I choose not to act upon my freedom to discriminate upon those who do engage in that criminal behavior

Look... if a business chooses not to discriminate because of it, that is their freedom.. they are not law enforcement... I may not agree, but I don't have to... if you decide to discriminate against a religious zealot in your place of business because of their behavior, how they appear to your customers, etc. I do not have to agree with you to embrace your freedom to do so

 

[Wyatt earp]

If they fail a drug test, I don't have an issue with an employer having the right to fire them, as long as its not prescribed for a specific medical condition.

If pot is legal there, you have a problem with people smoking a joint in their time off? On weekends? On vacation?

But it is still against the law of the land... it is still against federal law...

There may not be a law specifically against disturbing a bald eagle nest in your state, but there is a federal law that trumps it... it is, in effect, still against the law... you may indeed pass a law saying it is legal in your town to have sex with a beagle, but your state may still have a law saying otherwise... your local law does not negate the state law

I personally do have a problem with people using illegal drugs for recreational use.. it just so coincides my stance is in line with law.. but if I did disagree, my personal choice does not negate the law, even if I choose not to act upon my freedom to discriminate upon those who do engage in that criminal behavior

Look... if a business chooses not to discriminate because of it, that is their freedom.. they are not law enforcement... I may not agree, but I don't have to... if you decide to discriminate against a religious zealot in your place of business because of their behavior, how they appear to your customers, etc. I do not have to agree with you to embrace your freedom to do so

Its not about federal laws, companys are not cops and firing you for an illegal act. its a saftey issue and I think companys get insurance discounts if they drug test employees.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I'd like to know what action smoking off the clock will cause on the clock when not high?

It's like saying that you don't like ppl who watch cartoons because they can fuck up on the clock...what?

ps...the ppl who watch cartoons are most likely the ones smoking too lol

 

[Wyatt earp]

I smoke recreationally on the weekend and work at a desk during the weekday..

...who is in danger exactly?

.

Have to blame mother nature for letting weed stay in your system for 30 days on pee tests. And booze only a few hours. But I was told by a guy that they now have Alcohol tests that can detect if you used it in the past few days. He is on probation for a D.U.I and can not drink. never looked it up though to see if it was true.

Yea, definitely realize that these drugs are processed differently in our bodies and that this of course will lead to different results in the way we measure/detect when a person is using.

I'm just kind of sounding off on my frustrations of how pot is socially unacceptable in the business world while alcohol is. Seems a bit of a double-standard.

Anyways..

.

Yea I know I used to smoke pot all the time when I was a kid but quit and went to coke when I got a factory job. A harder drug but leaves your system in only a few days. but that was in the 80's before hair tests were cheap.

 

[Ravi]

Is this a new conservative value, persecuting someone for what they do in their free time?

 

[NoNukes]

It's an idiotic ruling. Can I fire someone if they had a few beers in their off time? Can I fire someone if they're on medication for depression?

What people do in their time off is none of the concern of they're employer. If they're performance slips then fire them for that. But it's idiotic to fire someone just for having residue of a legal substance in their body.

So you think it's ok for a guy to operate a crane or a train when he's high?

I drove trains high when I worked for the railroad in my 20s. Hell, some of the engineers were stone drunks, they were the dangerous ones.

If they fail a drug test, I don't have an issue with an employer having the right to fire them, as long as its not prescribed for a specific medical condition.

If pot is legal there, you have a problem with people smoking a joint in their time off? On weekends? On vacation?

But it is still against the law of the land... it is still against federal law...

There may not be a law specifically against disturbing a bald eagle nest in your state, but there is a federal law that trumps it... it is, in effect, still against the law... you may indeed pass a law saying it is legal in your town to have sex with a beagle, but your state may still have a law saying otherwise... your local law does not negate the state law

I personally do have a problem with people using illegal drugs for recreational use.. it just so coincides my stance is in line with law.. but if I did disagree, my personal choice does not negate the law, even if I choose not to act upon my freedom to discriminate upon those who do engage in that criminal behavior

Look... if a business chooses not to discriminate because of it, that is their freedom.. they are not law enforcement... I may not agree, but I don't have to... if you decide to discriminate against a religious zealot in your place of business because of their behavior, how they appear to your customers, etc. I do not have to agree with you to embrace your freedom to do so

I do not think the federal government is going to be bothering people because of the federal laws. They tried that in Alaska and were set straight.