Just curious, in states / countries where the recreational use/possession of mota has been legalized, what are the general professional norms around casual discussion of its use?
For context, I mean typical white-collar environments. Maybe a bank, or a creative agency, or a tech firm, or a government agency.
For what it’s worth, I work in a state where it’s NOT legal, and while the following statements about alcohol would be totally innocuous during general water cooler chitchat with my boss or my peers…
[ul]
[li]“We hit up the ball game Saturday night and had a few beers.”[/li][li]“I need to swing by the liquor store on my way home… there’s a limited release of Buffalo Trace I want to pick up…”[/li][li]“TBH I’m getting burned out on IPA’s.”[/li][/ul]
…I can’t imagine EVER saying something about passing around a spliff at a Dave Matthews show, or grabbing an ounce of a new strain of Maui Wowie, or feeling nostalgic for some good ol’ ditchweed in a similar situation.
I talk about it openly and unashamedly, even at work. I’m doing it as a deliberate effort to help normalize marijuana’s place in our society. Mind, I’m not some nutter who’s always going on about weed. But if someone asks what I did last night, I don’t feel I have to censor myself and not mention that I got high.
It’s going to depend on the particular company’s corporate culture, what types of work the company does, and so forth.
Here in Colorado, there are many companies whose income results in large part from contracts with the federal government. A standard part of those contracts is that the company is required to maintain a drug-free workplace. And–guess what!–the federal government still classes marijuana as illegal.
So even though it is legal on the state level, those companies must enforce the federal standards, or lose their contracts.
Employers continue to do drug testing, rightfully so, in places where it is legal. In our locations I know they do. Just like they do drug testing which includes alcohol. So having discussions at work about how wasted you got on pot is treated just as if you talked about getting drunk on alcohol. It isn’t a welcome or professional discussion. It doesn’t win you any favors, because the company discourages that behavior and doesn’t encourage the employment of those kinds of people which is why they do drug testing. Plus the health insurance companies certainly don’t want it because it increases costs. And again, the employers won’t want it because it has a negative impact on productivity, safety and liability. So my advice would be, if you do those things, stop doing them and don’t talk about it.
But you can indulge in alcohol without getting wasted. I’ve been in discussions at coffee time at work about different preferences in beer and Scotch, or red wine and white wine.
Why not have similar discussions about types of marijuana, and gummies, which store to go to for range of products, and so on?
If it’s completely legal, off-the-clock, and not involving excessive usage that might affect job performance, why can’t it be talked about?
But you can indulge in alcohol without getting wasted. I’ve been in discussions at coffee time at work about different preferences in beer and Scotch, or red wine and white wine.
Why not have similar discussions about types of marijuana, and gummies, and so on?
If it’s completely legal, off-the-clock, and not involving excessive usage that might affect job performance, why can’t it be talked about?
And the drug testing is more problematic for marijuana than for alcohol. Alcohol is eliminated from the body relatively quickly, so if you test positive for alcohol at work, you may be under the influence. But the markers for TCH take a much longer time to be eliminated, long after the effects have worn off. If you used weed in your own time on the weekend, a drug test doesn’t show signs of illegal activity and may not be any indicator of your ability to do the job.
I agree with this approach and it is how I approach the subject. If someone has a problem with it, I will point out that I have a medical card and ask if they have a problem with a diabetic using insulin.
In my workplace, once in a while someone makes an allusion to pot (wink-wink-nudge-nudge), and we all understand it. But nobody blatantly talks about it out loud. Especially if there are unknown or potentially hostile people in the area. Just because it’s legal doesn’t mean someone won’t try to use it against you.
For physicians, use of pot can be considered unprofessional, since cognitive and motor impairment can last for days after use. The medical examining boards can and will suspend a license if there are signs of impairment of performance or being under the influence of any substance while in a practice setting, no matter if consumption was legal, prescribed, and took place during non work hours. Medical licensure is a privilege, not a right. Patient safety comes first.
We don’t talk about it much unless we are in a small group of people we trust. But we wouldn’t talk about getting drunk either.
The Drug Free Workplace Act of 1988 is kind of vague about how to administer a drug free program, it just says that you have to have one in place to do business with the Federal government. It does not spell out how. We recently got notice that CBD products would be just fine since they do not contain THC. Which is bullshit because they all do contain traces of THC. Do not know how they will sort of get around that.
I work for a contractor to the federal government, on a federal base within a legal marijuana state. There is still pre-employment drug testing, but if you can’t stop for the two weeks it takes to clear your system, and you want a job, you have larger problems. After that unless you have an accident with a federal vehicle, or have a commercial driver’s license, you will never be checked again.
In 10 years of employment there, the only time that I have heard of someone being tested was a person who showed up for work obviously impaired. Even then there was a group of 4 upper management types that came to talk to her and after they determined that she was probably fucked up they asked her to report for a drug test. She refused and was escorted off the property. Had she reported for the drug test, and failed, she would have been referred to the Employee Assistance Program and likely retained her job.
Other business’ are simply ignoring the issue. The local Wal-Mart does no drug testing, even pre-employment cause they would have no workers at all.
My wife works in a manufacturing job. All about safety, safety, safety. The machines that slice up your toilet paper rolls are something that a brutal James Bond villain would strap him to. But those rooms are almost impossible to enter while the machines are powered. Still, they have moved on from urine tests which can detect drug use for weeks, to mouth swabs. If you didn’t just smoke or eat something before you came to work, you will pass.
Qadgop, am I correct that alcohol is eliminated on a linear basis, but TCH is more of a “half-life” basis (i.e. traces can stay in the system for considerably longer after usage than is the case with alcohol)?
I’d say it just depends on the overall culture of the office and your department. I’ve been in offices which have people so stridently anti alcohol that they’d blame even the tiniest slip up on alcohol. Type in one wrong formula in excel during a presentation and manager X would immediately assume you had a 3 martini lunch or were hung over as fuck.
But, I’ve also worked in brokerage firms where the old floor traders would tell you about the snorting cocaine off a key in the bathroom days. And, Ceres is known for the strongest drinks in Chicago and is right at the Board of Trade.
Marijuana would be the same. What’s the culture of the office? Millennials or a bunch of suburbanites that spend Monday mornings talking about the sermons in church yesterday.
As the owner of the company who set the alcohol and cannabis polices, people certainly don’t come and tell Me how they got baked on the weekend, but they also don’t tell me about getting drunk.
As an aside, our policy is the same for both - don’t be impaired when you are working. Both are fully legal in Ontario and mandatory drug testing is highly frowned upon here except for safety positions eg. bus drivers.
While IANAD, a big distinction is that metabolized THC is fat soluble. You store some of it off in your fat cells where is not being broken down and removed from your system. Overtime it comes back out of your fat and reenters the bloodstream where it can be eliminated. That makes it more complicated than simply saying it is a half life basis.
Mayo Clinic published approximate guidelines for how long that stored THC metabolite is detectable in the bloodstream. For a single use it is three days. For chronic heavy use, that is multiple times a day, it is still detectable in the blood for 30 days.
It’s completely legal at the state level, which is going to be problematic for a lot of companies. It’s not legal here in Minnesota, and I work for a defense contractor as a consultant at a federal facility, so even if it does get legalized at the state level, talking about it here in the office is still going to be wildly uncool.
As soon as you add the qualifier “at the state level” then it’s not completely legal in that community and for businesses in that community, as your post indicates.
Just to be clear, when I said “completely legal” I meant " no criminal consequences for personal possession or use". Legal to buy, legal to use, legal to possess, up to certain quantities for personal use.
We met a couple from Minnesota on vacation a few weeks ago (maybe you know them?). Talk turned to medical cannabis when I hit my pen, and they both seemed to think Minnesota will never legalize weed in any form.
We got an official warning from our Chief that even if we imbibed in a place where it is legal if we test positive for THC it is grounds for termination.
During my first career as a Sheriffs Deputy (retired 2007) if someone went on vacation to places like Amsterdam or Jamaica they were mandated to get tested upon their first day back at work. I have been told that now everyone gets tested upon returning from vacation time regardless if they traveled or not. I was at 7 weeks a year when I retired. What a PITA that would be.
ETA: I heard recently that an Officer for a local municipality was canned for testing positive.
Do you have a cite for that? I’ve heard plenty about the evils of The Devil’s Lettuce but never have I ever been told that motor impairment** would be an issue even the very next morning.
** by “motor impairment” I’m assuming you mean getting glued to the couch?
been told that motor impairment** would be an issue even the very next morning.