Okay I have 4.5 days to pass a drug test

[sharkkiller]

Well that goes back to my question earlier in the thread.  If I normally smoke pot every few days, then quit for a few weeks before I get tested, do you consider that cheating the test? 

 

If the entire point of the drug test is that "they do not want to hire someone who smokes pot," then clearly that would be cheating, right?

 

And if quitting before the test is not cheating, then the whole point of the drug test is to show you can stop smoking for a short period of time (which like I said earlier, makes drug tests silly and pointless)

 

 

Sometimes a drug test at the point of hire is to show multiple things:

 

1) That you are not stupid enough to smoke drugs knowing you have a drug test.

2) That you are able to stop for a reasonable enough amount of time, and therefore probably not an addict

3) Most of the time drug tests are not specifically for pot, but are for harder more troublesome drugs

4) To establish that drug tests are a part of the job, and that you should expect random drug tests. Which usually do not come with notice.

5) That you are honest enough to not use synthetic, or someone else's urine. This is part of a job interview, and if you are not trustworthy enough to pee in a cup and not cheat, how would I trust you with company financials, car keys, cash, etc.

 

 

But to answer your question, if you can stop using and pass the test, then no that is not cheating. Using someone else's urine, or a synthetic urine is.

[cptx]

 

 

Unfortunately they are testing the wrong drugs. 

 

This, and using the wrong tests.

 

And if a company is going to have a no-drug policy, urine screens are pointless. The harder drugs, the ones that are more likely cause problems, aren't detectable after a few days, or even a few hours in some cases. Do it right and run a hair follicle test and quit wasting time playing with pee.

 

*I'm not taking a side on which drugs are acceptable or not, I think people should be able to put whatever they want in their bodies.  Just saying that if an employer want's people that aren't using, they should screen using more accurate methods. A piss test is useless except for surprise spot tests. They are beatable with pretty much any prior notification.

[PhillyB]

i'm not going to judge the guy even though he's bwood and therefore an imbecile. i just hope he's not using weed as a proxy for healthier habits that would ultimately achieve the same (or better) results.

[Happy Panther]

This, and using the wrong tests.

 

And if a company is going to have a no-drug policy, urine screens are pointless. The harder drugs, the ones that are more likely cause problems, aren't detectable after a few days, or even a few hours in some cases. Do it right and run a hair follicle test and quit wasting time playing with pee.

 

*I'm not taking a side on which drugs are acceptable or not, I think people should be able to put whatever they want in their bodies.  Just saying that if an employer want's people that aren't using, they should screen using more accurate methods. A piss test is useless except for surprise spot tests. They are beatable with pretty much any prior notification.

The upside of the drug test from a cost benefit analysis is that it is stupidly cheap. It may miss many of the people it is supposed to catch but as long as it catches a few here and there it helps the bottom line more than spending $50 for a follicle test .

 

I'm guessing.

 

Giving each employee a full physical would likely help the company in many ways too but corporate America isn't shelling out for that.

 

It is unfortunate that the drug least likely to cost the company health money stays in the blood the longest.

 

It is just too bad that the drug least likely to 

[Harris Aballah]

I hope 805 gets the job and sells sharkkiller a lemon one day!

[sharkkiller]

I hope 805 gets the job and sells sharkkiller a lemon one day!

 

 

No worries about that, unless the job is in the Dominican Republic.

[MadHatter]

You are assuming that pot smokers are bad salesmen.

 

I am not assuming that at all.

 

My point is if the company did not care whether their employees used drugs, then they would not require a drug test as a condition of employment.

 

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

[KushMcDieselson]

Unless you are getting a high risk or security type of job, simple dip strip piss tests are used for most jobs, because they are cheap, and anything that can increase their profits is a good thing.  Most companies don't even give a poo about whether or not their low waged work force is on drugs, and they realize if they spent the extra money on an actual GC/MS they would have an even harder time finding and retaining their workforce.  The "drug free workplace" really just comes down to covering their ass in case something happens.  That's why pre-employment drug tests are simple and workplace injury or accident drug tests get shipped off to the lab and thoroughly inspected, any traces of an substances can shift the blame and monetary responsibility from the company onto the worker, a drug test sent to the lab is still cheaper than paying a worker's comp or any sort of legal settlement. They can always fall back onto the pre-employment test to backup their decision for hiring you.

[Happy Panther]

I am not assuming that at all.

 

My point is if the company did not care whether their employees used drugs, then they would not require a drug test as a condition of employment.

 

Why is that so hard for you to understand?

That isn't exactly what you said.

[MadHatter]

That isn't exactly what you said.

 

That is what I meant....not sure how it was interpreted another way.

[8 0 5]

Marijuana fact of the day:

@UncommonFacts: Marijuana has caused no death's, but the United States has executed over 323 people for dealing/growing it.

#stoptheignorance #legalizeit

[Jangler]

lol facts from twitter...

[sharkkiller]

Wow. really? 323 people were executed for dealing/growing pot? No murder involved? And you believe that?

 

And you had the nerve to call me ignorant?  

 

Wow.

 

United States Never imposed While current U.S. Federal law allows for the punishment of death for those who have extraordinary amounts of the drug (60,000 kilograms or 60,000 plants) or are part of a continuing criminal enterprise in smuggling contraband which nets over $20 million, the United States Supreme Court has held that no crimes other than murder and treason can constitutionally carry a death sentence

[Jase]

marijuana has caused zero deaths

 

 

lol