Starting in 2020, Nevada employers cannot refuse to hire a job applicant fo
r failing a marijuana screening test, making it the first state to pass suc
h a law.
"It is unlawful for any employer in this State to fail or refuse to hire a
prospective employee because the prospective employee submitted to a screen
ing test and the results of the screening test indicate the presence of mar
ijuana," states the law, signed by Gov. Steve Sisolak on June 5.
There are some exceptions. The law does not apply to firefighters, EMTs, em
ployees who operate a motor vehicle, or those who, in the determination of
the employer, could adversely affect others' safety.
Besides being an insane law, it should prove interesting.
Someone with THC in the their blood is a potential hazard on and off the jo
And employers do not have to give the reason for not hiring someone that I
Nevada may be on their way to becoming a modern Sodom.
Can lawmakers who passed that bill be sued if an employee hurts or kills so
while having THC in their system?
As weed becomes legal I think you will see more laws like that. If you
smoke, ut will show up a week or two after. So if you smoked a joint on
Friday night two weeks ago should you not be hired? But if you were
drink last night it is OK?
On Friday, June 14, 2019 at 11:23:02 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
t for failing a marijuana screening test, making it the first state to pass
such a law.
e a prospective employee because the prospective employee submitted to a sc
reening test and the results of the screening test indicate the presence of
marijuana," states the law, signed by Gov. Steve Sisolak on June 5.
, employees who operate a motor vehicle, or those who, in the determination
of the employer, could adversely affect others' safety.
t I know of.
You are right.
Alcohol is legal to buy in all states.
I think alcohol kills more people either directly or from accidents etc.
I wonder what happens when someone takes a test for drugs after a car accci
Is there a THC limit like there is for alcohol?
From what I've seen, it is a judgemental thing by trained police to
determine impairment. They have some tests you do, similar to the field
test for alcohol.
I do remember hearing there is some testing being developed like a
When they pass a stupid law like that, there should not be any
If I was running a business, I would not want to hire anyone that had a
drug habit. Where I worked at one time they would do a random drug
test. This was just a normal factory and nothing special.
Please explain a bit more.
Do you categorize a person that smokes a couple of joints on the weekend
a drug addict? You'd not hire them?
How about the guy that goes out to his car at break and lunch for a
couple of shots of vodka? He'd pass the piss test so he must be ok. Put
him on the fork lift.
Two of my best employees occasionally used marijuana on the weekend.
Come Monday morning they were alert and did an excellent job. Hard
drugs is a different story. Over the years a couple were let go.
No I would not hire anyone that smoked a joint or two on the weekend.
Most likely he would slip in a puff or two before he came into work.
If I caught a fellow slipping out for a shot of vodka or even a beer he
would be gone also.
Just let either of them get hirt on the job and the company is out big
One thing I did not like was when a company totally eliminate smoking
anywhere. If they had a policy before you were hired, that is one
thing, but not after people are there 20 years. The company I worked
for did that. At the time there were peobably 1000 people in the plant.
They did not allow smoking in the actual work areas, but had lots of
break areas and other places that you could smoke. Yes, I did smoke
when I was hired, but had been quit for about 20 years before the no
smoking policy went into effect.
Some of the better workers quit because of that. Others would sneek
around as this is a very large place and many areas where people do not
normally go, or not very often.
You are in a fantasy world. Just as people are sneaking a smoke, others
are sneaking a drink. It happens in most any place with more than a
couple of dozen employees. Much easier to hide alcohol use over weed.
I bet you are working with more alcoholics than you'd guess.
I may have been, but I knew a lot of them. The management seemed to
turn a blind eye for many years. As the plant ran 24/7 and 365 days a
year, about 30% of th eworkers were usually half drunk around Christmas
and New years.
I was surprised when I turned up a couple of heroin users at my old
company. I just thought they were just stupid but that demographic was
advantageous to have on the roster so they stayed as long as we could
carry them. Finally the customers forced the issue.
I had one mechanic who was so addicted to his nicotine sticks he
couldn't go from break to break without one. Caught him smoking in a
customer's car - and he was GONE!!! That was the last straw.
I always said he was so lazy he akways had his thumb up his ass and so
dumb he didn;t know his ass from a hoke in the ground - - - -
On Saturday, June 15, 2019 at 7:26:46 PM UTC-5, Clare Snyder wrote:
I knew a guy who pawned a tool to buy a pack of cigarettes.
I suspect that big tobacco puts something "extra" in cigs to keep people addicted.
This may be false, but I heard that the insecticides in cigarettes contributes to a lot of deaths.
I remember in junior high seeing a film showing a guy in a iron lung.
And maybe an autopsy of a smokers lung.
Made an impression on me.
Nicotine was still the addictive substance. Since cigarettes are
simply the delivery method why shouldn't they try to increase the
Have you seen what happened to pot since the ragweed people smoked in
They also distill wine and grain "beer" to increase the alcohol
Sugar is refined to increase the sucrose levels and they feed cows
corn and hormones to increase the fat level.
Welcome to America.
Seems like there is always some exception for the government jobs.
Even a while back business could not descriminate the LGBTs or whatever
they are, but the military did. I still say that there should not be
any law for the government that is not for all.
Even say the gun free zones. Even if at the White House will not let
the public in carrying guns, the guards should be outside the White
House and not inside unless sommeone gets in and does start shooting.
Years ago Ted Kenedy had some personal guards that started in one of the
government buildings with guns. I am not sure of the outcome,but the
guards were not tried for that offence.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.