First Guy to Buy Legal Pot in WA State

[Ben]

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SyzUwdtSous

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/wash-man-buy-legal-weed-spokane-fired-spotted-news-article-1.1861214

[fifth_column]

That's ridiculous.  What a person does on their own time is not their employers business.  Coming to work high, or drunk, is one thing, having a drink, or smoke, after work is another.

[Ben]

That's ridiculous.  What a person does on their own time is not their employers business.  Coming to work high, or drunk, is one thing, having a drink, or smoke, after work is another.

I would agree as long as whatever was in their system is out of it and not affecting their performance. However, If I were an employer, I wouldn't want any employees showing up high, drunk, or whatever. I'm pretty sure drug testing is standard for all security guard firms.

[BobR]

That's ridiculous.  What a person does on their own time is not their employers business.  Coming to work high, or drunk, is one thing, having a drink, or smoke, after work is another.

Well, here is what the guy had to say;

I’ve worked for them on and off for 12 years and several years ago, I signed a document that said I wouldn’t have (THC) in my system,”

I am subject to random drug testing and I can guarantee that if I show up with THC, ETOH, or any other substance that could impair me, legal or not, in my system there is an excellent chance I would be looking for employment of a different nature because I would most likely lose my professional license also.

bob

[onions!]

I feel really weird.
My upbringing and morals are conflicted with my (supposedly) adult,thinking brain.
One voice is saying"Good for his former employer!Firing's too good for him!".The louder voice is chanting"IT'S NONE OF HIS EMPLOYERS BUSINESS!"

If I had some dough and a brain I'd invent a non-intrusive two minute test that employers could mandate that would detect whether an employee were impaired before punching in before their shift.Could make zillions.

[dogmush]

That's ridiculous.  What a person does on their own time is not their employers business.  Coming to work high, or drunk, is one thing, having a drink, or smoke, after work is another.

BobR beat me to it.

He signed a document.  Given that they said he took the day off work, I'd bet that he was scheduled to work in that 24 hrs, and he showed up for a shift in violation of his agreement.

If, however, it turns out they called him in before he was supposed to show up for a drug test, I'd be more likely to side with the employee. (i.e. he got high after work on fri, knowing he'd be good by Mon and they called him in Sat, off schedule.)  If that would even clear his system.

CSD, how long does it take THC to clear urine?  The agreement was apparantlly not to work with it in his system.

[fifth_column]

I would agree as long as whatever was in their system is out of it and not affecting their performance. However, If I were an employer, I wouldn't want any employees showing up high, drunk, or whatever. I'm pretty sure drug testing is standard for all security guard firms.

Personally, I'd rather have an employee that over-indulged in marijuana the night before, than an employee showing up hungover.  Alcohol degrades performance much more than MJ, and the effects linger much longer. 

I understand that drug screening is usually a condition of employment.  But can you imagine if the screen included alcohol?  I assume it's not included now because it's legal.  Now with MJ being legal, in some states, will that change company policies?

[BobR]

He posted his resume on CraigsList out here, Looking through it, I can't say I am overwhelmed by it.  But the one part he put in there is kind of ironic;

Intelligent. Safety orientated. Common Sense. Quick learner. Good trainer. Computer skills.

Common sense....ummmm...maybe not.

http://spokane.craigslist.org/res/4560862522.html

bob

[Angel Eyes]

Best comment at the link:

A little discretion goes a long way. You are employed as a security guard which means a drug screen, maybe you want to re-think your priorities.
        On a positive note he has time now to do just that.

Does Spokane Green Leaf need a security guard?  Maybe Boyer could apply.  Then again, he might not be the most vigilant candidate . . .

[BobR]

The one issue I have with this is the fact that the drug test was not random. Most companies have policies mandating random drug screens, this one seems to be a targeted drug test based on his behavior off duty, not on duty. If he shows up at work visibly impared, then targeting is OK IMO, but the way this one seems to have been done doesn't sit well with me.

As the piss coordinator at my last active duty command, even though we were random, every now and then I would target everyone in the squadron. I got away with it by testing 100% of the squadron. For normal randomness, I had a ten sided die the XO would roll and whatever number popped up would be matched to last digit in SSNs for my sample pool for that month.


bob

[KD5NRH]

The one issue I have with this is the fact that the drug test was not random. Most companies have policies mandating random drug screens, this one seems to be a targeted drug test based on his behavior off duty, not on duty. If he shows up at work visibly impared, then targeting is OK IMO, but the way this one seems to have been done doesn't sit well with me.

This; I have never worked for any company that would test anyone who wasn't on the clock or paid-on-call.  The responsible ones also had a no questions asked refusal policy if you were called in (including employees on "as needed" shifts if they weren't being paid as on-call) on less than a certain number of hours' notice, specifically so that an employee drinking (or, for that matter, just staying up long enough to be dangerously fatigued after adding an unexpected 8 hour shift) on their day off wouldn't have to risk a DUI and/or termination or worse.

[cassandra and sara's daddy]

Pots the worst for clearing your system. You can test dirty if you lose weight even months after

[dm1333]

Pot isn't bad for you?!!!!!!?  Didn't any of you notice that shirt he was wearing?  Clear proof pot affects your judgment and your fashion sense at the very least!   

[Jamisjockey]

Employment is not a right.  If your employer requires you to be clean, and you're clearly on TV buying pot, and they test you....boo *expletive deleted*ing hoo.

[Perd Hapley]

Boyer’s phone buzzed as he took his first few hits: His employer wanted him to come in and take a urine analysis test within 24 hours. A client had seen the security guard on a newscast and was concerned about the drug use, Boyer said.

It seems he worked for a security company that had him stationed with a client that contracted for security service, and they're saying (in so many words) that their client wanted him gone. I would imagine that arguing with the client about this would have endangered the whole contract, and it may have been a large one. They may have had nowhere else to post him. Now maybe the company is just making it up, but maybe not.

That's ridiculous.  What a person does on their own time is not their employers business.  Coming to work high, or drunk, is one thing, having a drink, or smoke, after work is another.

On the other hand, the employer should (should) enjoy the legal right (of free association) to employ people on the conditions they choose, no matter how absurd those conditions may seem to others. And the guy DID step in front of a camera, and should have realized that people might not want a recreational pot user on their security team.    That may not make sense to a lot of people. Some would argue (have argued) that pot is the same as, or better than, alcohol, but public perception is what it is.

[Balog]

If his off hours behaviour negatively impacts the company, seems totally justified in firing him.

[Boomhauer]

One of the issues is that even though he may not be high at work, if an accident or an incident happens and he is required to be tested for it (several of my employers have mandated drug testing if involved in a work accident or work vehicle accident or other such incident) then it may be a question of liability when he pops hot on the drug screen.

[dogmush]

In case of any accident, Worker's Comp is going to want a drug test too.

[vaskidmark]

...., how long does it take THC to clear urine?  The agreement was apparantlly not to work with it in his system.

Depending on a) how much you smoked, b) how much THC was in what you smoked, and c) how active your kdneys are, THC can dop to non-positive test levels in as short as 12 hours.  OTOH, positive-test levels can remain in the system for as long as 60 days after abolute, controlled, verified beginning of abstinance.  Used to cause all sort of administrative hell in the treatment programs as well as in the larger prison discplinary system.

His employer's policy of requiring a drug test within 24 hours is pretty lax.  The "standard" has been to require a test sample be obtained within four (4) hours of notification except in cases of accident (property damage/personal injury) which has been a sample obtained within two (2) hours of notification.

Without doing any real research, there is a part of me that thinks he could beat the dismissal on technicalities related to the client reporting him to his company and the company's response of ordering the drug test without any corroborating documentation.  The "agreement" he signed may yet be the thing that hangs him regardless of whether it was to not have THC in his system (flat statement) or merely to not show up at work with THC in his system.  Especially so if he was certified/licensed as an armed guard, regardless of being armed or not on the job.

My personal bottom line take-away is: "Play stupid games, win stupid prizes."  Hopefully I would have been devious enough to take the stuff home and put it in the back of my sock drawer while waiting to see if my boss watched me on the news and whatever he did in the week following.  Plausable deniability - "Sure I was the first customer.  But I didn't use it - I just wanted the fame of being the first customer."  Pass a pee test or two, wait them out, and then prepare my written complaint of harassment if the testing continued.

stay safe.

[Doggy Daddy]

FWIW, at work safety sensitive employees can be tested for any of 6 reasons:
1) Pre employment
2) Random
3) post accident
4) return from extended leave/vacation (30 days)
E) post treatment after self-admitting before being notified of a test
6) reasonable suspicion.

I don't think it's much of a stretch to think the guy whooping it up on TV for being the fastest swimmer and buying the very first legal weed in the whole state just might test positive.      

[MillCreek]

He made the mistake of doing this in Washington, where we have appellate case law that your employer can fire you for failing a drug test from using medicinal marijuana on your own time.

[BobR]

He got his job back, it was all a misunderstanding.

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/legal-pot/firing-over-legal-marijuana-called-mistake-man-gets-job-back-n153276

Really not surprising, this is where a Deputy Sheriff was fired for spending his duty time enjoying the company of his girlfriend (married to someone else) when he should have been patrolling. He got his job back within days of being fired. :(

I guess that is one way to make sure "you go home at the end of the shift", spend in the relative safety of your girlfriend's bedroom.

bob

[Perd Hapley]

Relative safety? He's in some married lady's bedroom. No danger of being attacked there.  

[Balog]

After all I've read of Spokane PD I hate the thought of even driving through there.

[BobR]

Relative safety? He's in some married lady's bedroom. No danger of being attacked there.  

This was a strange one, the neighbors thought he lived there, his cruiser was parked there so much. I may have been mistaken about her being married, I can't find that anywhere now, but thought I had seen it around the time it happened. Turns out she may have a police fetish, she had just recently accused a city cop of stalking her. Strange things afoot in this little town. At least the Spokane cops haven't shot any one this month....yet.

http://raisedonhoecakes.com/ROH/2014/05/29/sex-lies-cops-unions-who-could-want-anything-more-in-a-story/

bob