employment drug testing: wt-----

amb

NES Member
Rating - 100%
20   0   0
Joined
Feb 23, 2008
Messages
910
Likes
69
Location
Massachusetts
I'm doing engineering work for a company now with a lot of government work, and formerly worked at an FFRDC directly working (often on-base) for the DoD, and I've never pissed in a cup for it. (The FFRDC reserved the right to require one if you f***ed something up in a way that might have been drug-related.)

My understanding is that the federal government requires some kind of explicit drug policy, but not necessarily regular testing. Makes it easy for employers that want to test anyway to lie a little and say "the feds make us do it" though. In my world it's all supply and demand, it's hard enough finding good engineers without giving them another reason to go work for Google.
 

andrew1220

NES Member
Rating - 100%
115   0   0
Joined
Oct 2, 2011
Messages
13,110
Likes
6,466
Location
North Shore
If your company was a federal supplier or contactor, drug testing, random or otherwise, is part of the rules of being a federal supplier.
I was a EPA contractor and had to get piss tests every 3 months. Though I thought it was a company policy, NOT a contract requirement with EPA? But I could be wrong. Left that job earlier this year...
Basically a joke since we all knew when our next drug test would be. You could certainly do drugs and still pass the tests if you time it right - with weed anyway. I don't know how long stronger drugs like coke stay in your system.

The EPA employees I worked with, didn't get drug tested on a regular basis as far as I knew. I remember a couple years ago when one of them got called for a random test and they panicked and went to the local GNC to get some sort of body cleansing crap. I think they ended up passing the test but they said they smoked like 2 weeks prior...
This employee ended up leaving EPA...
 
Last edited:

Dench

NES Member
Rating - 100%
99   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
17,151
Likes
5,625
. You could certainly do drugs and still pass the tests if you time it right - with weed anyway. I don't know how long stronger drugs like coke stay in your system.
Coke is 3 days. Pot is by far the longest lasting drug that will show in urine tests.

Ironically the stronger drugs that have drastic and strong highs have the shortest window to catch in a test. LSD is under 24 hours, E is 3 days, Meth is 3 days, etc.
 

Darksideblues42

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
14   0   0
Joined
Dec 20, 2013
Messages
2,488
Likes
1,825
Location
Hudson, MA
Coke is 3 days. Pot is by far the longest lasting drug that will show in urine tests.

Ironically the stronger drugs that have drastic and strong highs have the shortest window to catch in a test. LSD is under 24 hours, E is 3 days, Meth is 3 days, etc.
Shortest window to catch in a Urine screen. There is still hair testing, so if someone is a long term user, the drug can still show in hair samples.
 

Dench

NES Member
Rating - 100%
99   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
17,151
Likes
5,625
Shortest window to catch in a Urine screen. There is still hair testing, so if someone is a long term user, the drug can still show in hair samples.
Thought experiment: how far back should a drug test go for a job if there was no restriction on the test?
 
Rating - 100%
13   0   0
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Messages
10,487
Likes
4,022
Location
Toy Town
Is the person impaired now/while working? No? Then no problem.

Why should anyone give a damn what people are doing on their own personal time if it's not affecting their job performance?
Whiz quiz every morning when you walk in the door. Sounds good to me.
 
Rating - 100%
1   0   0
Joined
Jun 9, 2008
Messages
11,199
Likes
3,685
Whiz quiz every morning when you walk in the door. Sounds good to me.
The "whiz quiz" doesn't tell me if you're high/trippin/on pills/etc right now, only if you've used it in the recent past. The only "drug" that we currently have a test for to see if someone is currently impaired is alcohol. I used to work with a guy who used marijuana regularly (there are probably many others, he was just open about it). He was at work, on time, doing his job effectively and efficiently every day, and never came in impaired (at least not in a way that was noticeable or affected his work). After work he'd go home and as he was getting ready to wind down for the night he'd fill his pipe and smoke in the same way you or I might have a beer or two while watching the game. If he didn't talk about it, you never would have known. Compare that to someone who uses tobacco, where every hour they're away from their desk for 10+ minutes because they went outside to smoke...in addition to all the coffee/bathroom/snack/etc breaks that everyone takes. From what I've seen with that, tobacco is far more detrimental to workplace efficiency than the person who uses marijuana on their own time. I know we have (or had) a member here who admitted that they used to use harder drugs on a regular basis on their own time and were perfectly functional for their job. Your off-time should be yours.
 

1776

NES Member
Rating - 100%
73   0   0
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
4,085
Likes
1,540
Location
SE MA
Last edited:

appraiser

NES Member
Rating - 100%
16   0   0
Joined
Mar 14, 2008
Messages
10,121
Likes
4,225
Where does a synthetic like Tramadol fall?
Will tramadol show on a 9 panel drug test?
Tramadol is detectable in the urine for two to four days. It generally will not show up as a positive for opiates on a drug screening test such as might be done for employment, but tramadol can be detected on a prescription drug screening test.

I have a sh*tload of Tramodol, probably 500 pills if I had to take a guess. We gave them to our dog for pain relief. The Vet would give them to me 300 at a time, my Dentist, who is a personal friend I have known for close to 20 years can only give me a script for 4 at a time.
 

1776

NES Member
Rating - 100%
73   0   0
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
4,085
Likes
1,540
Location
SE MA
Third world city doctors in SE MA will give crap for pain relief. They only tell you to take Tylenol. Pure A-Holes because of their cities drug problems. And, they probably get an insurance kickback for not prescribing.
 

Chevy 2 65

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 29, 2013
Messages
15,196
Likes
5,959
Location
Somewhere in the sands of time
Asking for a drug test is fairly common nowadays. Mostly for the company to protect themselves in the event someone goes off their rocker while employed. I don't see it as a 4th A infringement as I'm a hiring manager and want to know who and what I'm employing.

Good luck in your hunt.
How about testing for Alcohol? or asking how much do you drink in a day or weekend.
 

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
6,870
Likes
4,256
How about testing for Alcohol? or asking how much do you drink in a day or weekend.
This highlights an important point, most drug testing is about illegal drugs (or safety). So it isn't, wasn't, just about drug use. It was about engaging in illegal activity, which could be used to influence you. The legalization of MJ on a state level but not on a fed level has complicated the situation. So I would expect policies to eventually catch up, more rapidly once, if, the fed get onboard with legalization.
 

1776

NES Member
Rating - 100%
73   0   0
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
4,085
Likes
1,540
Location
SE MA
Whatever your employer finds out about you will be used against you, especially if your over 40 or 45. Normal prescriptions will tell them how much of a risk you will be and/or a drain on their benefit services. I was told by my employer that they do not recognize pain or disabilities as a valid reason for not performing your tasks at the expected levels. They initiated the termination process prior to a third surgery that I had to move up to stop their process by going on disability. They fired my manager for letting me do that. Total A-Holes playing in their snake pit.
 

Dench

NES Member
Rating - 100%
99   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
17,151
Likes
5,625
Thought the question was about drug test not sobriety. Not sure when Dench's comment jumped the track.
You said that the types of work you do it makes sense to have a drug test with employees presumably not using off duty, right?
 

AHM

NES Member
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
Joined
Dec 30, 2013
Messages
5,943
Likes
3,092
Reading this thread with my X-Ray Spex,
OP is actually afraid that if he took a pre-employment drug test,
the employer would realize from the results
that he really did want the job because he was bored with retirement,
"... and have you considered just taking drugs to end the boredom?"

Piss testing is not a 4a issue in my opinion. If I'm having a person doing a job that requires concentration......or they are going to kill someone......they are pissing before I hire em

Or you can always get one of those prosthetic penises and the heated bag. There was a website a long time ago called Urine Trouble that had everything you needed. Looked like a lifelike strapon attached to a catheter bag with a heater.
Sometimes one gets the idea from all the off-hand remarks that
the Whizzinator show was Howie Carr's favorite.
(Much as the Neuticle show was Eagan and Braude's high water mark).

My last drug test was a saliva test not the usual pee test
I just invented the Spitinator.

I can’t imagine hiring an unknown again unless I can fully vet them with a credit check, background check and drug test. Fortunately, my office situation is stable and probably won’t need to hire someone anytime soon, if all goes well I’ll ride this crew into retirement.

I hired one that on paper looked great, excellent interview, presented well, an employers dream. A couple of months after I hired her I learned about her bankruptcy, the foreclosures, the impending divorce. She was a train wreck. Didn’t last long and she screwed me on unemployment on her way out. ... My bad for not running a credit check, I wouldn’t have hired her if I did. Lesson learned.
Federal FCRA now places strict constraints on employer credit checks.
And I'm not sure that summary fully describes employer responsibilities
when they use a credit report to reject a candidate.

Military drug tests are supervised. Yes, some poor E4 has to watch you piss in the cup. It’s just how it goes.
I once read that back in the day it was the ship's Master at Arms who had to hold the cup.
And that a good fraction of the crew suddenly developed the wobbles while trying to aim.

I couldn’t get over the amount of hopheads out in civilian life. I guess I’ve been sheltered from these marijuana junkies based on me being pretty antisocial.
I hear the entertainment industry is particularly rife with abuse.

No pee test for me, but I'm not allowed to have nose, lip or cheek rings.
Well, so much for your future career as a webmaster.
 

1776

NES Member
Rating - 100%
73   0   0
Joined
Mar 5, 2006
Messages
4,085
Likes
1,540
Location
SE MA
So let's see what some employers Millennial Twit is thinking up for you. Here's a guy that's post retirement and looking for work and income that looks like old meat waiting for an industrial accident that will carry an OSHA fine that's far less than the companies insurance policy on the employee, and the plus is that the fine print that you signed says your remains can be sold by the company for medical research! Now for the drug test results that show what your taking for side effect evaluation in planning your demise!

Walmart Took Secret Life Insurance Policies Out On Employees, Collected After Their Death
 
Last edited:
Rating - 100%
9   0   0
Joined
Jun 25, 2010
Messages
8,015
Likes
1,834
Location
WNW of MHT
Most employers do the same thing, and there's nothing wrong with that. Losing an employee costs the employer money to replace that employee and train the new one up to the same level of competence.

That's what insurance is for.
It's the "in secret" part that is creepy. Per the article, "only six states, (DE,GA,NJ,NC,PA,VT), allow companies to take out life insurance policies on their employees without notifying them.". So if you work in Vermont, maybe ask your employer some pointed questions?
 

Rob Boudrie

NES Member
Rating - 100%
5   0   0
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
36,184
Likes
13,501
Most employers do the same thing, and there's nothing wrong with that. Losing an employee costs the employer money to replace that employee and train the new one up to the same level of competence.

That's what insurance is for.
Insurance companies exist to make an actuarial profit on the insured. It would not seem to make sense for a gigacorp to pay for insurance rather than self-insure.

What does make sense is "key man" policies for small closely held companies. This cushions the blow, and can prevent the minicorp from being liquidated to pay the decedant's heirs his/her share of equity in the business.
 

Dench

NES Member
Rating - 100%
99   0   0
Joined
Mar 24, 2008
Messages
17,151
Likes
5,625
This highlights an important point, most drug testing is about illegal drugs (or safety). So it isn't, wasn't, just about drug use. It was about engaging in illegal activity, which could be used to influence you. The legalization of MJ on a state level but not on a fed level has complicated the situation. So I would expect policies to eventually catch up, more rapidly once, if, the fed get onboard with legalization.
This might be the case in niche security clearance positions or positions where an employee was vulnerable to blackmail. Short of that, the safety aspect flys out the window entirely as alcohol is the undisputed king of substances that lead to the most damage.
 

Picton

NES Member
Rating - 100%
26   0   0
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
11,151
Likes
10,434
Location
MA
This might be the case in niche security clearance positions or positions where an employee was vulnerable to blackmail. Short of that, the safety aspect flys out the window entirely as alcohol is the undisputed king of substances that lead to the most damage.
If anyone was actually serious about limiting the damage substance abuse causes, then alcohol would be banned.

But we’ve seen how that works.

So? It’s mostly window dressing, just like the rest of the War On Drugs.
 

42!

NES Life Member
NES Member
Rating - 100%
7   0   0
Joined
Apr 9, 2010
Messages
6,870
Likes
4,256
If anyone was actually serious about limiting the damage substance abuse causes, then alcohol would be banned.

But we’ve seen how that works.

So? It’s mostly window dressing, just like the rest of the War On Drugs.
Who said it was about substance abuse, it about liability. Or because their gov contact requires it.
 
Top Bottom