Employee THC Test

Had an employee gash himself at work today. Bleeding pretty good so we sent him to urgent care. Urgent care gives him 7 stitches then calls us and tells us he is acting very strange and they recommend a drug test. Will we authorize a drug test? Yes I say. They tell him he needs to take a drug test. He goes out the door without taking the test and comes back to work. I tell him that if he refuses the drug test I'll have to let him go. He goes back to urgent care but it takes him 2 hours to get there, the place is 10 minutes away. What the hell took you so long? I was hungry so I stopped for lunch he says. It's never dull around here. I'll find out tomorrow if he passed. It's my understanding that THC stays in your system for something like 10 days. What could he do in 2 hours to pass the test? This guy is an ok worker and well liked around here, not the best decision maker but I'm not looking for an excuse to fire him.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Golden seal or any number of drug test masking products. With a two hour window including time to empty his bladder once it’s possible that this was his course of action.

adh2000 said:

...It's my understanding that THC stays in your system for something like 10 days. What could he do in 2 hours to pass the test?

Click to expand...

It depends entirely on what they tested. Urine tests are not easily defeated because they test for metabolites which stay in the system for 7-10 days.

Saliva tests look for THC and only show very recent use- a few hours.

There are ways to beat saliva tests. Urine tests can't be defeated because the sample is split. If the initial screen is positive, the sample goes to the lab for a GC/MS, and that is definitive.

guest said:

There are ways to beat saliva tests. Urine tests can't be defeated because the sample is split. If the initial screen is positive, the sample goes to the lab for a GC/MS, and that is definitive.

Click to expand...

You live in Oregon dude. You should know better.

Urine tests are easy to beat, especially the cheap ones they do at urgent cares. They don't send those to a lab, unless it's requested. No one does Saliva tests, because they don't matter. What is in your Saliva doesn't effect your decision making skills.

OP if your guy passes, leave it alone. This is 2018 everyone smokes pot. If he's on Meth or Heroin that's different IMO.

R

I was on a random drug test plan with a company I was working for. One of the guys found out about the random test and ran home and had his wife piss in a bag, he knew she was clean. The only problem for him is his test come back pregnant.

What they'll do at Urgent Care is a screen. Either a dipstick or it's built into the cup. If it's positive, the sample goes to the lab. The lab does a GC/MS, and that shows everything. Golden Seal or cranberry juice or anything else isn't going to hide THC or it's metabolites from a mass spec.

They're moving to saliva tests because they are less invasive and instant, and some employers are using them in house. But it's not testing for metabolites, so it's only good for a few hours. I've had a saliva test at the HR office the same time I was filling out the employee paperwork.

If the employee was stoned at work and injured himself, you can't leave it alone. There is a medical record, an L&I claim, and the PA or nurse called the employer and reported suspected drug impairment. It would make the company liable, and next time it might be his coworker that gets hurt.

If the screen is negative, that can be the end of it. But if it's positive, the employer can't ignore it. You have to send it to the lab, or the employee can voluntarily quit.

I don't care if someone smokes pot. Harder around here to find someone who doesn't. But work is work.

true temper said:

I was on a random drug test plan with a company I was working for. One of the guys found out about the random test and ran home and had his wife piss in a bag, he knew she was clean. The only problem for him is his test come back pregnant.

Click to expand...

Heard of a guy who dumped alleged beer in the sampler. Anal-hoser Buttwasher, yet. Tester told him his pet Weasel had syphilis.

2018 or not, no, NOT "everybody smokes pot".

That's one of the "American Diseases". Rationalizing that it has no adverse effects is also on the list.

No fear. Humanity will survive.

Plenty of folk outside the US glad to take up the slack.

Not everyone smokes....I dont...my friends dont. Interestingly enough most people who do smoke will tell you there is nothing wrong with it....its healthier than blah blah blah......Maybe.....but how come those of us who dont smoke can recognize that certain look about those who do? Just sayin....

I have a few co-workers who do. A few years ago one of them cut his hand at work. They sent him in for stitches and a piss test. There was never any question that the test would come back positive. It was really a matter of HOW positive. Company put him on regular testing with bench marks for the THC levels. He did good....he actually seemed alot more engaged at work. After that incident....any time someone who knew they would fail a piss test got hurt in a relatively minor way (stitches etc) they would basically shove their hand in their pocket, tell the boss they were sick and needed to go home. Then they would go to the doctor and say they got cut at home thus avoiding the piss test. We have health insurance so assuming a deductible etc it might cost a couple hundred bucks to avoid the piss test and resulting hassle.
In the last couple of years the company I work for has changed their policy. I heard it was because they got wind of what was happening and didnt like the idea of people getting hurt and not getting the care they needed asap. You no longer get piss tested for cutting your hand or something minor like that. I do believe there would be a test for something major or for hurting others.....but i am not certain. We are a large enough employer that I guarantee this was done in conjunction with our insurance carrier. Liability can be twisted in many directions. I wonder if maybe knowing employees were going around the system to avoid the piss test opened them up to a new level of liability assuming they did nothing to prevent that.

I know its not totally on point, but when I was a recruiter we had to give the kids a piss test the day before they went to MEPS to verify that we arent gonna waste a bunch of tax dollars. The tests we gave we almost instantaneous (within a few minutes) and were pretty accurate when it came to the difference between the MEPS test and what we used.

However, the local GNC had a product for like $80 that "masked" the weed, but it had telltale signs for what it was. Had a few recruiters busted for trying to pass potheads to MEPS.

true temper said:

I was on a random drug test plan with a company I was working for. One of the guys found out about the random test and ran home and had his wife piss in a bag, he knew she was clean. The only problem for him is his test come back pregnant.

Click to expand...

Jr high level humor isn't helping the OP.

adh2000 said:

This guy is an ok worker and well liked around here, not the best decision maker but I'm not looking for an excuse to fire him.

Click to expand...

Then why the hell are you sending him for a drug test?

I could understand testing a new hire, someone you don't know, but the guy has worked for you for a while. Wouldn't you trust your own personal interaction with him to be a better indicator of his suitability for the job rather than the results of a test that determine he smoked a joint last weekend? In your eyes, does that alone make him unfit for the job?

My wife is an RN and does these tests every day. To your original question. You can go to any porn store and get a kit to mask a piss test, this may or may not work. If they pull a hair and test it your done, THC can be found about 30 days after smoking a joint. By the way, the stories of what people say and do to pass are hilarious, guys microwaving someone else's piss is my favorite. Somehow they think the nurse does not take the temperature of it. The nurses have fun with it too, if they suspect a guy has warmed piss in a bag, they make him wait a little longer so it cools off, sometimes they just have the doc actually watch him go..

toolsteel said:

Not everyone smokes....I dont...my friends dont. Interestingly enough most people who do smoke will tell you there is nothing wrong with it....its healthier than blah blah blah......Maybe.....but how come those of us who dont smoke can recognize that certain look about those who do? Just sayin....

I have a few co-workers who do. A few years ago one of them cut his hand at work. They sent him in for stitches and a piss test. There was never any question that the test would come back positive. It was really a matter of HOW positive. Company put him on regular testing with bench marks for the THC levels. He did good....he actually seemed alot more engaged at work. After that incident....any time someone who knew they would fail a piss test got hurt in a relatively minor way (stitches etc) they would basically shove their hand in their pocket, tell the boss they were sick and needed to go home. Then they would go to the doctor and say they got cut at home thus avoiding the piss test. We have health insurance so assuming a deductible etc it might cost a couple hundred bucks to avoid the piss test and resulting hassle.
In the last couple of years the company I work for has changed their policy. I heard it was because they got wind of what was happening and didnt like the idea of people getting hurt and not getting the care they needed asap. You no longer get piss tested for cutting your hand or something minor like that. I do believe there would be a test for something major or for hurting others.....but i am not certain. We are a large enough employer that I guarantee this was done in conjunction with our insurance carrier. Liability can be twisted in many directions. I wonder if maybe knowing employees were going around the system to avoid the piss test opened them up to a new level of liability assuming they did nothing to prevent that.

Click to expand...

They deal with the statistical realities they cannot change, actuaries and inch-hoorance underwriters do..

But.. it was already well-known by the Vietnam War era - half a century ago, now, even IF we ignored what the Arab, Persian, and Hindu worlds had already known for more than a thousand years - that hashish / THC degrades time and distance computation, judgement, and/or the give-damn ABOUT such things. "Situational awareness" one of the modern terms.

"Accidents" - many of them deadly ones - ensued with everything from weapons to vehicles, to simple digging tools. There's no mystery there. Never was. Not since the pyramids were still new and shiny.

Just the self-justification of a progressively higher percentage of damned fools.

As always, it takes lots of potential competitors out of the game in a highly competitive world. Their offspring, too, and that's all part and parcel of the deal.

I'm good with that. "America" was never just a "place".

It has always been easily as much a state of mind. One not limited to the North American Continent, nor the English language.

I'm good with that as well. Those who prevail have always written human history. Not the self-inflicted casualties who littered the long trail.

THC "heads"? And worse? It isn't a "moral" issue. Personal judgement - or lack-of - rather.

No need to wage war, rage against their issues, waste a dime on treating their "problem" nor pay them much mind atall. They can heal themselves. Or not.

Just avoid them.

They'll reap what they've sown without any help. Sooner their numbers elope from the gene-pool, the better.

Wiser folk don't need a damned thing they have. Least of all their excuses.

Derek Smalls said:

Then why the hell are you sending him for a drug test?

I could understand testing a new hire, someone you don't know, but the guy has worked for you for a while. Wouldn't you trust your own personal interaction with him to be a better indicator of his suitability for the job rather than the results of a test that determine he smoked a joint last weekend? In your eyes, does that alone make him unfit for the job?

Click to expand...

Have you been paying attention at all? Employee got injured and the medical staff recommended a drug test based on his behavior. What was I supposed to say? "No don't do a drug test, he normally acts like that". I don't care what people do on their own time but if you show up for work stoned and get injured that's a problem same as showing up drunk and getting injured. How would you like to be in a trench setting rebar knowing the guy up top on the machine is wasted?

I am an ex smoker. All you need to pass a pee test is a box of sure gel gelatin, the kind you can with, and a Gatorade. It's a natural masker so it doesn't show up. Pee once then take the test.

adh2000 said:

How would you like to be in a trench setting rebar knowing the guy up top on the machine is wasted?

Click to expand...

How would you feel the wee hours of one Long Binh morning you find six idiots smoking-up on a bunker full of a ton or three of Magnesium four-deuce flares and Willy-Peter and nasty-frag last-ditch defence rounds ....'coz the CLEVER BRILLIANT Mike-Foxtrots figured for-damned-sure no one would EXPECT them to be in THAT place?

Fuckwits. God must have figured she had a shortage of 'em, or she'd not have created druggies!

What is company policy?

This needs to be in clear language in the company handbook

Drug test kits are currently available for home use now at Amazon for very few bucks.

One could get some and have some placed in a glass fronted case like fire extinguisher style.

Company policy can be simple and clear that everyone is subject to testing as conditions of employment and one will be required on any and all accidents.

This may power your insurance so check with them to see as it may require specific process.

It may or may not be legal so check with your local labor department.

These things are showing up more often in the news and they usually use federal laws for investigations as it is still considered not legal.

The company policy manual should already have language covering being drunk or it better have anyway, should be easy to do what traffic system has done to change from drunk driving that is specific to alcohol to impaired to cover assistance that can cause impairment.

Lookup your local terms for DUI and use them.

Your guy could have been killed and it would have been your fault for not officially denying this activity.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

thermite said:

How would you feel the wee hours of one Long Binh morning you find six idiots smoking-up on a bunker full of a ton or three of Magnesium four-deuce flares and Willy-Peter and nasty-frag last-ditch defence rounds ....'coz the CLEVER BRILLIANT Mike-Foxtrots figured for-damned-sure no one would EXPECT them to be in THAT place?

Fuckwits. God must have figured she had a shortage of 'em, or she'd not have created druggies!

Click to expand...

Sometimes I think you're stoned based on the way you type.

adh2000 said:

Have you been paying attention at all? Employee got injured and the medical staff recommended a drug test based on his behavior. What was I supposed to say? "No don't do a drug test, he normally acts like that". I don't care what people do on their own time but if you show up for work stoned and get injured that's a problem same as showing up drunk and getting injured. How would you like to be in a trench setting rebar knowing the guy up top on the machine is wasted?

Click to expand...

Actually I'm having trouble paying attention because of the huge bomber I just smoked.

Just joking, I actually do not do drugs of any kind, but I've had a lot of friends and coworkers who do, and/or drink heavily. Some of whom are great worker and are very skilled, whom I have entrusted life and limb with many times, and will in the future, others, not so much.

My point had nothing to do with whether drug use is good or bad, or whether or not it's ok to show up to work under the influence of drugs or alcohol, I think we can all agree that certainly the latter is NOT good. My point is rather that a drug test is not going to determine whether a person is currently under the influence, or simply had used used drugs in the recent past, so it's results are not always all that relevant, or helpful.

If you know the person, and what is "normal" for them, YOUR OWN perception will be a much better test of that. You didn't seem to think the guy was acting weird the day he was injured, you stated "he normally acts like that". Maybe he's afraid of hospitals, or he gets sick when he sees blood, lots of reasons he could have been acting "weird" at the hospital, but he wasn't acting "weird" to you. You didn't seem to suspect drugs to be an issue, OR, the cause of the injury until the hospital reported his "weird" behavior to you.

I can understand the use of drug tests on a perspective employee. When you meet the person for the first time, you have very little to judge them on. So, you look at things like education and work history, references, talk to past employers, drug test, ect. to try and gage what type of employee this candidate may be. Once the person has worked for you for a while, you should have enough first hand knowlegde of their personality, abilities, intelligence, training, and work habits to determine if the employee is a good fit for your company.

If an employee is reasonably intelligent, shows up on time ready to work, works hard, follows directions, has his head in the game, and is a team player, I really don't care what he does on his own time, nor do I care what a drug test reveals. I simply want that person to be healthy and happy and continue to work for me.

On the other hand, if an employee is a space cadet, is always late/absent, accident prone, can't remember or follow directions, shows a lack of care in his work, has trouble getting along with others, or demonstrates any other major flaw that makes me not want to keep them employed at my shop, than I will seek to get rid of them, immediately. I can than understand the use of a drug test if drug use is suspected as a means to this end, but I really don't care whether the test is positive or not, I just want him gone either way!

You said that you don't want to fire the guy, he's an ok employee and you're otherwise happy with him. My point is only that in that case, why give him the test? If he's clean, you've gained nothing, but insulted the guy with your suspicion. If he had happened to smoke a joint with his buddies last weekend, you loose an otherwise good employee for that??? Does that seem worth it to you? Is that really a gain in your book?

tdmidget said:

Jr high level humor isn't helping the OP.

Click to expand...

Yet the good humor is lightning witty. I give him credit for good humor.