remember back in the day when drug testing busted people for drugs because of poppy seeds (as on bagels)
Did this actually happen?
Occasionally, it seems. It’s usually a matter of dispute because the “poppy seed bagel defense” is such a well-known excuse, it’s probably been used by people who are not always entirely on the up and up. But in cases like the above it does seem more a matter of an idiot organization using an insensitive test and then not following up properly before calling the authorities.
ETA: Yet another feather in the cap of our fine American healthcare system 
.
I can’t speak to poppy seeds specifically but back in the day (early '80s) my future wife was a lawyer in USAF. Drug testing was new then and the official position was that a) drug tests are infallible, b) the sample custody procedures are perfect, so c) all positive test results are absolute proof of guilt so punishment or dismissal from the service was practically instant and practically automatic after a brief kangaroo hearing. Which made her job as the designated defense attorney very very difficult.
There was quite a fight by both the legal and medical establishment to convince the brass that both (a) & (b) assumptions are false, especially at DoD’s scale. By the time she left the service a few years later things had smartened up a bunch. Custody procedures were much better, split samples were required, all positive tests had MRO review, and there was an acknowledged list of legit foods and medications that triggered false positives, etc., etc.
But the big difference was getting the brass to alter their hidebound ideas about (c). I suspect there are still cockamamie organizations that think the same way today: a positive test is proof of something bad and we don’t want any of that around our company. Probably mostly due to a misplaced fear of some nebulous legal liability attaching to the company if that employee was later involved in a problem.
And totally missing the concern they should have about the legal liability the company will have for wrongful termination.
Schools have kids. The slightest suspicion, even if later disproved, of bad behavior on the part of an employee would be grounds for a hefty lawsuit if some child is injured. Even years later, possibly even by someone else. Lawsuits are really unpredictable. Being a teacher or anyone around kids means keeping a squeaky clean record. No system will take a chance if there is anything in the record. Even if it was disproved today, a lawyer could use it to cast doubt on the system some time in the future. It sucks, but the margin for error when dealing with kids is very very small.
Yes, you are being lied to. Most public teaching jobs test you pre-employment, and then never again without cause. I worked for 12 years at a Federal teaching job. Once you were hired I never heard of anyone ever being tested again. It was a Federal position without allowance for local or state legal pot or anything else. Much stricker.
Some indication caused enough concern to re-test and they got fired, for cause.. Your charity is commendable, just understand that is what it is.
You state that as fact. Have any cites for this rather absolutist position?
You have a good point. I should not have been so absolutist. There are approximately 20,000 school districts in the US (cite: nces.ed.gov/ccd/tables/202324_summary_2 ). I do not know how to insert a cite, every time I paste the cite it resolves and seems to lose it’s origin. The above is the best I can do. I have experience with 1. So I should not generalize. 
But I know when the lawyers brief our board and the superintendent speaks about personnel policies, the absolutist attitude is regretted and consistent. There have been multiple instances where employees harmed children and in retrospect there were “signs”. The school system (insurers) paid big settlements. Almost any documented instance of illegal activity is grounds for immediate dismissal. The Union helps when they can, but there is only so much they can do. When the lawyer recommends playing it safe, the board really has no choice. Ignoring such recommendation would endanger the insurance and the board can’t face the cost of a large settlement. Perhaps a large urban school system could roll the dice, but our system is a not that large (35000 students and $450M budget). But as you said, my position is way too absolutist for the entire country.
That might be true, but a teacher will (almost as to not be absolutist) always be tested only is there were suspicion that they were high at work. So to the OP is your friend were tested it is almost assured he were high at work and then what does that say about a “false” positive.
Thank you for this. I hope everyone on this board reads this and recognizes themselves, our tendency to claim broad basis of fact when our experience is narrow has gotten much worse over the years.
I taught in several schools and districts for 15 years before retiring, and in my experience policies and practices varied extremely widely.
If I remember what I’ve read correctly, McDonald’s used to (still does?) have hamburger buns with poppy seeds all over them.
Hm… Let me see if I remember…
“Two all beef patties
Special sauce
Lettuce, cheese,
Pickles, onions,
On a sesame seed bun”
My memories of a jingle from the 1970s seem to disagree.
Did you actually remember that or fudge and look it up? LOL
It’s seared into the memories of most of us who lived through that era.
Pretty much. All of the kids on the bus were singing that catchy jingle. “Seared in” describes it well.
That’s kind of scary. 
Plop! Plop!
Fizz! Fizz!
Oh, what a relief it is!
The jingles writers of old were insidious.
And I presume poppy seeds would only test as heroin/morphine (opiods). I am guessing (any experts here?) that there are separate tests for methamphetamines and for THC, or is meth essentially chemically an opiod?
I recall reading about some roadside drug test mentioned several years ago that was notoriously unreliable.
AFAIK no poppy seeds on McDonald’s buns.
Yes, all of us know that jingle. It was impossible to escape.