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

[annadote]

No I don't think it should be excluded from drug testing, because when you use marijuana you are still impaired which could affect your working situation.

I agree. It could affect job performance and the employer has the right to be aware of anything that might affect someone's ability to do their job and possibly protect the safety of others. Just because the practice is becoming more socially acceptable, doesn't mean that employers should be required to ignore it (especially if the substance is illegal in the state where the job is).

[ptfunds]

Yes, it should be excluded. If you live in a state where marijuana is legal then it would invade privacy to include this in a prescreening. We don't test for alcohol or prescription drugs. Both of which are far more impairing that marijuana.   Bottom line, employers hire employees for their level of talent, commitment, and longevity. Because someone smokes marijuana (could be medical) does not make them a bad employee. Just as someone who drinks a beer or two at night, or takes sleeping pills, etc. is not either.

We would live in a very narrow world if we tested people on every stimulant or relaxant they put in their bodies. Worry about how someone performs at work. Nothing else. The rest is not your or their business. 

[darkxtsuna]

No, I don't want to get (RIP) just cause some person was high off his horse and did not pay attention.

[yikes77]

It's going to be interesting once it becomes legal in Canada next month which is where I live (never smoked it, don't intend to.)

[Kiraleen]

No, not until it's legal nation-wide, and there's a standardized system for its strength and potency as with alcohol.  Sometimes there's other drugs added into the pot that the smoker may not even realize there, too. The social standarizations have to be in place, too.

[michele2042]

My simple answer is yes, I think it should be excluded.  I'm not a fan of drug testing for employment.  If someone does drugs or drinks to excess it will eventually catch up to them in their performance.   Especially since it's legal in some states but I would imagine those states no longer test for pot.   

[kathleenkleinhans]

No,  someones life could depend on the job applicant

[UGetPaid]

Yes, it should be excluded. If you live in a state where marijuana is legal then it would invade privacy to include this in a prescreening.

We would live in a very narrow world if we tested people on every stimulant or relaxant they put in their bodies. Worry about how someone performs at work. Nothing else. The rest is not your or their business.

I had to read this through twice to make sure I read correctly and then I highlighted two of the comments. Without intending to offend, I find these two thoughts to be a bit ridiculous.


First, the fact that a mind altering drug (which may also affect job performance and efficiency) is legal in a particular jurisdiction does not automatically make it an invasion of privacy to screen for it.


Second, it seems to me that "how someone performs at work" is at the very heart of the need to test for this drug and it absolutely and positively IS the business of the person doing the testing by definition!!!   They are hiring someone to work in their business so that employee's drug use IS their business!!!

[paints]

Drug testing is problematic in the first place.  It is an invasion of privacy. 
What I smoke, drink, or do on my off time is nobodys' business.

[pectacon]

I'm not sure how marijuana works, if there's a way to distinguish recreational pot smoking from medicinal oils or derivatives like that in the test, that is an important distinction to make. I used to write off pot smoking as bad all around, but I know a few people now who have used oils (or whatever they make out of it that doesn't get you high) and it has really helped their health problems.

[ghunter]

No, it should not, drugs are drugs

[adriarobi]

Yes. It would affect your job, no matter what.

Affects your performance, your reliability in doing your job, and even how you interact with co-workers.

 

[dogsleash]

yes it should

[Segun15]

No i don't think it should be excluded. An employer should be able to know if his or her employees are impaired or not. Some thing with the police and jails they have a right to know

[teenangel]

I don't think that it should be excluded employers have a right to know if the person that they are ready to hire as their employee is impaired or not