Contractor Talk - Professional Construction and Remodeling Forum banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 473 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
To those contractors working in places with legal recreational marijuana use, are you hiring employees who test or would test positive for THC?

Or, if your state legalized recreational marijuana would you change your drug testing policy?

I don't have any employees but if I did hire one I doubt I would do a drug test initially. I'm just curious how the industry will tolerate new substance abuse laws.
 

·
Contractor of the Month
Joined
·
26,075 Posts
To those contractors working in places with legal recreational marijuana use, are you hiring employees who test or would test positive for THC?

Or, if your state legalized recreational marijuana would you change your drug testing policy?

I don't have any employees but if I did hire one I doubt I would do a drug test initially. I'm just curious how the industry will tolerate new substance abuse laws.
If you won't hire a guy that tests positive for THC you are going to have a hard time finding laborers.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,308 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Inner10 said:
If you won't hire a guy that tests positive for THC you are going to have a hard time finding laborers.
Oh I'm sure of it. I don't care what goes on in a hand's free time.
 

·
Champion Thread Derailer
Joined
·
1,228 Posts
It seems to me that the crux of the point would revolve around someone being impaired while on the job. Alcohol is legal, but we don't usually associate its use while at work, or impairment in some way from it (pukin' sick and ends of hair sore from previous night's social entanglements)
 

·
Contractor of the Month
Joined
·
26,075 Posts
Also if I understand correctly it stays in your system for 30 days as well, that's why most professionals who have to undergo drug tests use drugs that pass through the system quicker...like cocaine.
 

·
Head Light Bulb Changer
Joined
·
847 Posts
I've often wondered what the legalities are if you refuse to hire someone who tested positive for pot, but they have a prescription for it. Could that be considered 'discrimination'? I don't care what you do on your own time, but don't be on my jobsite toking up (or drinking).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,732 Posts
I could see some OTJ injury s being denied coverage...

I've worked at places that require a test with any trips to the er or dr.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
Anti-wingnut said:
But you are still eligible for WC no matter the result
In Missouri, when there is an accident and requires treatment, most insurance companies require a drug test to be administered. Benefits are automatically cut in half with a positive a drug test.
 

·
Head Light Bulb Changer
Joined
·
847 Posts
But you are still eligible for WC no matter the result
Not according to my policy. It has specific language about illegal drug use and denial of benefits. I believe that's the industry standard, but I don't know for sure. I don't smoke (anymore), so it doesn't concern me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,076 Posts
Around here, between state and local laws, an employee just about needs to beat someone to death with a giant block of heroin, before you can politely wonder whether he has a drug problem and could use some help.

Edit: Well, OK, that's a slight exaggeration. Drug testing is pretty much limited to employees with clear public safety roles - bus drivers, etc. It's not allowed, even post-accident, with other employees, unless there's some compelling evidence that drugs were the cause.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,306 Posts
I just went to a seminar on this topic..... This is for states with medical marijuana. You as an employer do not have to recognize medical marijuana as a medicine and can hire and fire at will.....This is were it gets weird (unless it is a federally funded project). Then they are protected, but cannot be using on the job site.

I still don't grasp why federally funded projects allow medical marijuana when it is still federally illegal, but that's the government for you. As for states that have recreational use you can hire, fire, and drug test as you want. There was an employer that tested for tobacco and fired anyone who tested positive. It went to trial and they found the employer to be within his rights as his health insurance premiums are affected by tobacco use.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,306 Posts
Some unions still do not allow pre hire drug screening.... Most do, but in Chicago you cannot pre hire test an Iron Worker. All other locals you can, just not iron workers...... They must need drugs
 

·
Administrator
Maker of Fine Sawdust
Joined
·
51,879 Posts
If it's legal then wouldn't it be discrimination to not hire someone based on their legal use of a substance?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,940 Posts
In Missouri, when there is an accident and requires treatment, most insurance companies require a drug test to be administered. Benefits are automatically cut in half with a positive a drug test.
Not so simple. The use must be against company written policy, and (1) contributory or proximate (2) to the accident.
287.120

6. (1) Where the employee fails to obey any rule or policy adopted by the employer relating to a drug-free workplace or the use of alcohol or nonprescribed controlled drugs in the workplace, the compensation and death benefit provided for herein shall be reduced fifty percent if the injury was sustained in conjunction with the use of alcohol or nonprescribed controlled drugs.

(2) If, however, the use of alcohol or nonprescribed controlled drugs in violation of the employer's rule or policy is the proximate cause of the injury, then the benefits or compensation otherwise payable under this chapter for death or disability shall be forfeited.

(3) The voluntary use of alcohol to the percentage of blood alcohol sufficient under Missouri law to constitute legal intoxication shall give rise to a rebuttable presumption that the voluntary use of alcohol under such circumstances was the proximate cause of the injury. A preponderance of the evidence standard shall apply to rebut such presumption. An employee's refusal to take a test for alcohol or a nonprescribed controlled substance, as defined by section 195.010, at the request of the employer shall result in the forfeiture of benefits under this chapter if the employer had sufficient cause to suspect use of alcohol or a nonprescribed controlled substance by the claimant or if the employer's policy clearly authorizes post-injury testing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
649 Posts
Anti-wingnut said:
Not so simple. The use must be against company written policy, and (1) contributory or proximate (2) to the accident. 287.120
You're right. I went through this a couple years ago. I just didn't get all that technical here. I had/have this policy in our company handbook, with signatures from all employees.

I think all commercial contractors in Missouri have this policy in their company manuals. If they don't, then they may need to reevaluate their insurance company.
 
1 - 20 of 473 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top