Should marijuana be excluded in drug test for employment? What do you think?

[kimber62372]

Eventually it's going to be legal, so why not? People use it for medicinal reasons and have scripts for it, so why bother wasting tax payers money to get tested for this drug. The test will pick up others anyway.

[ajamimajida]

it should be part of the test since it can be dangerous to work high

[teenangel]

no business need someone who is stoned. for most jobs a person who is stoned its not good, it hurts the business if something happens to that person or business

[pkrahmer]

It think weed definitely should be included in an employment drug test. it affects everyone differentlyand when you use it you are impaired. The only  possible exception would be medical weed. But also depends onthe job. anyone driving ,caring for someone etc should be a user of and drug including weed.

[hawkeye3210]

Normally every controlled substance is included in a employment drug test. Since weed is becoming more acceptable today, should it be excluded? Most states have already legalized while others haven't.

It's still a federal crime.

[UGetPaid]

Absolutely Not!!!!!!!!! There is no reasonable argument (in my opinion) to remove this from employment drug testing. The arguments made by some that it is legal in many states or that it is a natural substance that God created for us to use are not very convincing (in my opinion, but others may disagree).


Legal or not, God given or not, it is still a dangerous mind altering drug which affects productivity. If an employer has two equally qualified and capable job applicants (one who smokes marijuana and one who doesn't) - I think he/she has the right to know and select the non-user and I do not believe that is discrimination in any way.

[plennis]

All drugs should be included in the testing.  Alcohol is  legal too, but you do not want drunk employees.

[camellia0]

I do not use marijuana, but I think that it should depend on the job. If someone is working at a store, then it should be excluded, but if someone is a doctor or has a job where they need to be alert and focused all the time, yeah, they need to be tested.

[freedavis]

I think it should cause it’s being legal in many cities.  Long as you are not using at work

[lhz123]

Safety first and always be 100% in good shape.

[countrygirl12]

I don't think it should be excluded. Alcohol is legal. That doesn't mean you can show up to work drunk and/or drink on the job.

And people may not know this but alcohol is part of a standard drug test. Or at least it was the last place I worked. If it showed up you didn't get a job.

[countrygirl12]

I don't think there is any need to drug test(for employment) someone who is stoned or reeks of pot, next applicant.  An existing employee you would need to for proof to fire.  I had to Google this pot remains detectable for 5-8 day after the 1st use,  and for 11-18 days if used a couple times a week.  I don't think it would be any different than somebody getting drunk on Fri and/Sat night,  just alcohol doesn't leave residue for weeks. So maybe instead of test or no test,  maybe certain level say a trace amount would be ok.   

The only proof you need is if they fail the drug test. As a business owner I have a right to say I do not want druggies working for me.

Not sure where you googled but pot can show up in a urine test for 30 days.  And in a hair test for 90 days.

[countrygirl12]

Eventually it's going to be legal, so why not? People use it for medicinal reasons and have scripts for it, so why bother wasting tax payers money to get tested for this drug. The test will pick up others anyway.

Tax payer money does not pay for drug testing.  Either the employer pays for it or they make the potential employee pay for it.  And no it won't eventually be legal.  It is some places and the states where it is legal they have already realized making it legal was a mistake.

[countrygirl12]

It think weed definitely should be included in an employment drug test. it affects everyone differentlyand when you use it you are impaired. The only  possible exception would be medical weed. But also depends onthe job. anyone driving ,caring for someone etc should be a user of and drug including weed.

Medial "weed" should NOT be an exception.  Even the pain killers that people take can effect you getting a job. An employer does not have to allow people who are doped up to be working for them. THEY are responsible. If I have someone working for me and they are doped out of their mind (even on pills given by a doctor) and they do something foolish and cause somebody to get hurt then I as the employer am responsible and have to pay for the damages.

[countrygirl12]

Absolutely Not!!!!!!!!! There is no reasonable argument (in my opinion) to remove this from employment drug testing. The arguments made by some that it is legal in many states or that it is a natural substance that God created for us to use are not very convincing (in my opinion, but others may disagree).


Legal or not, God given or not, it is still a dangerous mind altering drug which affects productivity. If an employer has two equally qualified and capable job applicants (one who smokes marijuana and one who doesn't) - I think he/she has the right to know and select the non-user and I do not believe that is discrimination in any way.

Morphine comes from a plant as well.  smh.

And I totally agree with you.  I would not want any person who uses drugs to work for me or with me on any job.