Tag: marijuana testing

Should Employers Still Test for Marijuana?

Critics are pushing back against the testing because of the amount of time THC can stay in the system after being ingested.

A recent feature on CNBC posits a question that has grown in relevance over the past few years, and is likely to continue to grow in the months to come: as more states and districts legalize marijuana for medical and recreational use, should businesses continue to use drug testing for THC to determine whether a prospective employee should be hired?

CNBC noted the disparity between employees – both current and future – that drink alcohol after work or the day before a job interview and those who use cannabis for medical or recreational purposes.

The former, if tested, shows no sign of impairment when tested the following day, but the cannabis user will present positive signs for THC up to 30 days. For some employers, the positive test would bar them from hiring that individual or keeping them on the payroll. But as rates of marijuana positivity in test results on the rise, should testing remain a deciding factor in hiring or employment?

The CNBC feature quotes data culled by Quest Diagnostics, which found that positives for drugs in all areas of the workforce, including federally mandated, “safety-sensitive” jobs reached a 14-year high of 4.4%, which is 25% higher than the 30-year low of 3.5% noted between 2010 and 2012.

When factored into other recent statistics – the increase in the number of states that have legalized cannabis (currently, 11 states and Washington DC) and the lowest US unemployment rate in 49 years (3.7% in July 2019) – CNBC queried whether it was not only fair but also financially responsible to weed out potential employees due to cannabis use.

Marijuana Advocates Chime In

Marijuana advocates certainly don’t agree. “An employer can basically refuse to hire you or discipline you for a positive THC in your blood, even if you’re a lawful medical marijuana patient using lawfully under state law,” said Tama Todd, vice-chair of the California Cannabis Advisory Committee, and a lecturer on marijuana law and policy at Berkeley Law.

“The test of whether you have THC in your system is unrelated to whether you’re impaired at the time. It shows positive even if you used marijuana a week, two weeks ago. It’s basically like a morality test,” said Todd.

CNBC also noted that Nevada, Maine and New York City have all passed laws that prevent employers from refusing to hire a person due to a positive test for THC, and a number of companies have either removed marijuana from their drug test panels or are in the process of changing their policies in regard to drug testing. “The labor pool is so tight that they feel like drug testing is going to prevent them from being able to staff adequately, so they don’t drug test at all,” said Judi Braswell, vice president of business development at Behavioral Health Systems.

As Todd told CNBC, more companies will follow suit. “Once the idea of legalization and people lawfully using marijuana becomes more normalized in people’s minds, it’ll lead to, ‘Oh, it’s sort of like alcohol. And why would we discipline or not hire a qualified candidate because they engaged in lawful activity off duty?’”

View the original article at thefix.com

2 August 2019
Screening Job Applicants For Marijuana Use Is Now Against The Law In NYC

NYC is the first jurisdiction in the U.S. to explicitly prohibit this practice.

Most New York City employers can no longer require a marijuana test from job applicants as a condition of employment. The new law, which the City Council “overwhelmingly” passed in April with a 40-4 vote, will take effect in May 2020.

“If we want to be a progressive city, we have to really put these things into action,” bill sponsor and NYC public advocate Jumaane D. Williams said at the time.

NYC is the first jurisdiction in the U.S. to explicitly prohibit this practice.

While Mayor Bill de Blasio had said that he would sign the legislation—calling it a “healthy step” and “part of how we change our culture to be less punitive and exclusionary”—he ultimately did not sign.

Marijuana Moment reports that it is “unclear what changed” between then and now. Regardless, the law will take effect in one year.

The bill’s text reads: “[E]xcept as otherwise provided by law, it shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice for an employer, labor organization, employment agency, or agent thereof to require a prospective employee to submit to testing for the presence of tetrahydrocannabinols or marijuana in such prospective employee’s system as a condition of employment.”

Certain occupations—“safety and security sensitive jobs”—are exempt from the rule including construction, law enforcement, child care, medical care, truck driving and aviation.

Federal or state employees and government contractors are also exempt as they do not fall under the city’s jurisdiction. Employers may also test workers if they appear to be under the influence of marijuana at work.

Williams, who authored the legislation, says the city will not wait for the state government to legalize marijuana for it to start reforming marijuana policies. “NYC must lead the way on this issue,” he stated.

New York’s efforts to legalize marijuana for recreational use have lost momentum ahead of the time remaining in New York’s legislative session.

The New York Times notes that while it is still possible for the state to “legalize it” by late June, it’s unclear whether NY lawmakers have finally come to agree on the details of the marijuana legalization initiative.

“It’s clear that we cannot wait until legalization on the state level before moving to reduce the impact that marijuana prohibition has had on individuals and communities,” said Williams. “Testing isn’t a deterrent to using marijuana, it’s an impediment to opportunity that dates back to the Reagan era—a war on drugs measure that’s now a war on workers. We need to be creating more access points for employment, not less—and if prospective employers aren’t testing for past alcohol usage, marijuana should be no different.”

If legalization does not happen this year, the state is planning to expand its medical marijuana program, NYT reported.

View the original article at thefix.com

15 May 2019
Fewer Employers Screening For Marijuana Use

Employers are less willing to limit their pool of qualified applicants by screening for personal marijuana use.

As marijuana becomes legal in more places, fewer employers are screening potential applicants for cannabis use.

“We’ve seen that companies have to adapt with what happens with legislation within the country,” Lauren Lewis, a recruiter in Buffalo, New York, told WKBW News.

According to WKBW’s report, about 21 percent of the U.S. workforce uses cannabis regularly, defined as once or twice per month. That means that employers who disqualify people who use the drug can really reduce their pool of applicants.

“You can limit yourself from a lot of potential employees by not allowing it,” Lewis said.

While employers are more likely to disregard cannabis use outside of work hours, being intoxicated on the job is still unacceptable. However, certain industries take a harder line toward any cannabis use. Federal contractors and the federal government, for example, are required to maintain a cannabis-free workplace.

Certain jobs, like those in which people are operating heavy machinery, may be more likely to care about cannabis use, Lewis said. “Because they have really need their cognitive function to perform the position,” she added.

“Really a lot of companies are really walking a thin line. There is still a lot of gray area regarding marijuana use in the workplace and drug testing for it,” Lewis said.

This is especially complicated when a person is using medical marijuana. People who use medical cannabis have argued that denying them for a job or firing them over use violates the Americans With Disabilities Act.

In New Jersey a judge recently ruled that employers cannot fire people who test positive for medical marijuana. “The sweeping effect is you can no longer say, ‘You (tested) positive — you are outta here,’” Maxine Neuhauser, an employment expert, told NJ.com.

The ruling shows that the issue of cannabis use is not black and white, even though marijuana remains entirely illegal at the federal level.

“There had been a general belief that since marijuana is illegal under federal law, employers would not have to accommodate its use by employees, even if they had a prescription for it and using it legally under state law,” Neuhauser said. “This appellate case very strongly came down in the opposite direction following the lead of other states confronted with the same issue.”

Lewis said that employers are realizing they need to have a more in-depth conversation about cannabis.

“We have to make sure they are aware and start thinking about thinking a little more open mindedly,” she said.

View the original article at thefix.com

1 May 2019
Cannabis Lab Loses License After Falsifying Results

The move has created something of a bottleneck as Sequoia Analytical Labs was one of only four cannabis testing labs in Sacramento.

A Sacramento cannabis testing lab, Sequoia Analytical Labs, has lost its license after a surprise inspection by state regulators. The lab, it turns out, had been falsifying data, with 22 out of a required 66 pesticide tests having made-up data.

According to Sequoia Analytical Labs’ general manager, Steven Dutra, state regulators came in on a surprise inspection of the facility and found that some of the lab equipment was faulty. The lab’s director, Marc Foster, knew that the equipment was faulty and said as much to the inspectors when asked where the data had come from.

“When they asked the lab director where his data came from, he honestly told them, ‘I faked it,’” said Dutra.

Foster was fired and the lab lost is license. The impact of the faulty equipment goes back about five months, with around 700 samples passing through without actually being tested. Despite this, Dutra says that the risks these 700 samples pose to consumers is slim, considering only 3% of the product ever fail the pesticide tests. And if anything has happened, it probably would have already happened by now.

“Much of the product is just gone and probably already consumed,” Dutra concluded.

As of now, no recalls have been put out by any regulatory body as a result of the incident.

“Basically, everything is being taken care of by the state,” said Tommy Pawloski, dispensary manager at Sacramento’s All About Wellness. “If there is a problem, the state will let us know.”

While the lab’s shutdown was necessary, the move has created something of a bottleneck as Sequoia Analytical Labs was one of only four testing labs in Sacramento. There are only 44 such labs serving the entire state of California. With one less lab in play, the industry could be looking at a shortage of products on the shelves.

“The shortage of labs has really created a bottleneck in the supply chain across the state,” commented Joe Devlin, head of cannabis policy and enforcement in Sacramento.

Sequoia Analytical Labs has since hired a replacement for Foster and hopes to get its license back by January 1st.

View the original article at thefix.com

10 December 2018
Device To Test Drivers For Cannabis Impairment Approved In Canada

After legalizing cannabis in June, Canada’s government is cracking down on drugged driving.

Our neighbor to the north has settled on a method that law enforcement officers will use to test motorists for cannabis impairment.

Canada became the first major economy, and the second country in the world after Uruguay, to legalize cannabis this past June. With legal sales to begin on October 17, it appears that Canada won’t have to wait for a reliable test that can detect cannabis impairment in motorists.

Immediately following the decision to legalize (with Bill C-45), Canada made major changes to its impaired driving laws with Bill C-46, High Times noted.

This included the use of roadside drug tests, but now, the government has approved a specific device for the job—the Dräger DrugTest 5000, a roadside saliva drug test device that analyzes a mouth swab for the presence of THC.

The device was approved by Canada’s Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould, following a review of its effectiveness by an independent panel of traffic safety experts and toxicologists.

According to the Los Angeles Times, the device—already in use in Germany and the UK—tests for the presence of cannabis, cocaine, opiates, methamphetamine, amphetamine, methadone and benzodiazepines, but does not measure the level of intoxication.

Gauging if someone is “high” on cannabis is more complex than testing for alcohol intoxication. It’s uniquely difficult to test for impairment from cannabis because THC can remain in a person’s system for weeks, therefore its presence does not necessarily indicate that a person is impaired.

This has presented a challenge as more federal and local governments choose to legalize cannabis in some form.

While the Dräger device does not specify impairment, neither does Bill C-46, which gives police officers broad discretion when it comes to motorists who come up positive for THC. They are allowed to charge a driver with drug-impaired driving “based solely on the presence of THC,” High Times reported.

However, officers will still need “reasonable grounds of suspected drug activity” to administer a drug test on a driver.

The Canadian government will continue to invest in improving drug testing to counteract drugged driving. According to High Times, the national government has allotted $81 million over five years to purchase drug-testing devices and toward training police officers on how to use them.

View the original article at thefix.com

1 August 2018