Curious to see if he’s lying to me, though I’ll keep it vague just in case.
Friend worked as a substitute teacher at a California public school for 14 years but iirc he’s not part of a Union. He randomly got drug tested a month ago (it was a standard random test) and it popped as a positive for meth. Now he claims it was for a weight loss drug that was doctor prescribed and he is fighting it, but he claims even a false positive drug test with a medical excuse means he automatically gets fired from his teaching job and is unable to reapply for an entire year so now he’s out of a teaching job for an entire year.
I’m legitimately curious if he’s telling me the truth, mainly because he’s now also heavily implying he needs a couple thousand to help survive the month and I REALLY don’t want to give him any money if it was a legitimate firing for a drug addiction issue because I’m been in this situation in the past (inadvertantly feeding somebody’s drug habit via loans that were never repaid)
I don’t believe it. The way a drug screen for employment works, even for random screenings, is the results are screened by the medical review officer (MRO). If there’s anything positive, the MRO contacts the employee and asks if there’s any medical reasons that explains the results. For the most part, a legitimate medical reason will be a prescription.
Don’t count on that, nor that employers are willing to entertain challenges to the validity of positive illicit drug tests. And it is possible that a number of prescription medications and unregulated supplements could generate a false positive indication for methamphetamine/amphetamine:
If there is a legitimate cross-reaction (I’m assuming phentermine since it is the only weight loss drug in the list of the link above) then the o.p.’s friend should be able to present his prescription and request a medical review by the physician who reviews and certifies the results ninja’d by @Odesio] or at least demand confirmatory testing for the specific substance. If the (hypothetically) false positive was due to an unregulated supplement…he’s probably screwed.
Also, some ADHD meds are amphetamine or methamphetamine. It’s not rational that a teacher could be fired for it without having the opportunity to show the Rx for it, considering how many of their students are prescribed it.
I’m not suggesting the OP reveal the info to us, but everything about this story depends on the details of the school district employing the teacher. And whether & how California law requires drug testing for teachers and/or protects the rights of testees.
If just the “I was drug tested” part is true, then it’s certain the district has some written policy. Which they probably mostly follow. And which might be publicly available. Which policy will indicate whether a) teachers are subject to random screening, b) how positive results are reviewed, and c) what happens to teachers awaiting the results of a review.
I worked 35 years in a non-teaching union job with random drug screening. A positive test was cause for immediate removal from duties, which also meant an immediate cessation of earnings. Followed by an MRO review as described upthread. After a weekish, if cleared you’d be returned to work, minus whatever earnings you lost for work you hadn’t performed. If not cleared, you’d be unceremoniously fired. Any further appeals would be through a wrongful termination action pursued first through the union grievance procedures and later the courts.
But all that was simply a creature of the laws relating to DOT covered employee drug testing, my specific employer’s policies, and my specific union contract.
If the OP cares to know the exact truth, start by searching CA law and the website(s) of the school district. All else is guesswork.
Side matter:
It’s unclear to me how much a substitute teacher, as opposed to a regular everyday teacher, is a full up employee of the district, as opposed to being, say a 1099 contractor or some sort of casual part-time no-benefits worker. The upshot being that there may be legal or policy protections that apply to full-timers that are withheld from substitutes.
Again the generalities of other folks’ collective experience (including mine) is indicative, but only the personnel policies of the actual specific district will be controlling.
There could be truth to it because it has happened to some athletes, notably tennis players. Drugs/medications/supplements that, overall, are quite acceptable can contain an ingredient that is on the banned list. It only takes one. Certain legal, over-the-counter drugs like
pseudoephedrine and ephedrine were historically common precursors used to make methamphetamine. So those perfectly legal drugs would not be acceptable on a drug test.
I would guess that substitute teachers have very few protections. I’m not surprised that they would fire someone for relatively minor things. I was under the impression that they weren’t actual employees. I thought the school district would call when they needed one and that’s the only time they got paid. If someone failed a drug test, I’d guess they’d remove that person from the program without doing much follow-up.
Yeah, it’s gig work. He wouldn’t have been fired; he would have been disqualified. Job protections for that kind of work is virtually nil. When I was a teacher in California, my union wouldn’t have allowed anything remotely like a random drug test for their members (all regularly certified and employed techers).
FWIW, Google found this for “weight loss” “meth” “false positive”:
Phentermine was initially approved for medical use in 1959. It was meant to act as an appetite suppressant that, alongside proper diet and regular exercise, would assist those struggling with obesity.
Will phentermine show up on a drug test? Yes. However, if medical documentation of the drug’s use is provided, it can be presented, and if needed, the false positive may or may not be negated.
In the end, the short and simple answer to our question is “no,” but it will produce a false-positive confirmation for amphetamines.
The point is, whether the OP should loan this person money.
I still say “no”.
First, I’ll never understand friends asking friends for cash loans. Good way to not have a friend.
Second, the person, by their own admission was fired for something.
The friend can say they popped the drug test by some prescribed medicine all day long. If that’s true, as soon as they produce the ‘script, they’d presumably be reinstated.
Third, I think there are agencies that manage substitute teachers which might have their own employee requirements. Including random drug testing.
A couple of thousand is a lot to ask of a friend. Maybe a couple of hundred is okay if it’s a good friend. A couple of thousand is a lot of money. And likely his money woes won’t be over at the end of the month, so next month will probably be more of the same. He probably needs to think about how he can become financially stable without depending on his friends to keep him afloat. For the short term, he could consider setting up a gofundme. That way people can give whatever they want and can afford.
As a note, under Federal Law a non-union public school teacher is still protected by their collective bargaining agreement. It’s just that union members may have more protection.
Also, random drug testing after hire is extremely limited (to be practically non-existent) in California.
What I find odd is that he got fired for alleged drug use, even though he has a prescription BUT the district will let him reapply next year. Seems to me they either would permanently ban him or accept the test gave a false positive.