What happens to oilfield testing when weed is legal

[waterninja]

After reading a couple posts on this thread I am reminded of a thread I posted a couple weeks ago about a wallet that was found with Cash and drugs in it near a fresh logging site. Most members thought it was OK to try and find owner and return the cash and drugs since it might have been for personal use. Seemed like a lot of members had no qualms about working with/besides someone who was stoned


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[coastalhunter]

Originally Posted by Xbolt7mm

Im just interested when it will be challenged, i understand the impairment

That's the thing though; companies are free to create their own policies, which you are to follow as terms of your employment. You are also free to work elsewhere.

I don't understand how some people think that because it's legal, it's ok to be under, or recently under the influence and work for an employer, on private property and not be under any moral/legal obligations to be fit for working around others.

[Zip]

Originally Posted by DanielLee5

What about medical marijuana ? I never smoke both medical and recreational, so I just wonder if smokers are allowed to drive even if they were prescribed to use medical weed.

okay ill bite on this one...this thread is fairly old, and you bring up a question like that...maybe some common sense would go a long way here, smoking any dope legal or not legal and you should not be behind any wheel of any vehicle...your impaired, its actually quite easy to figure that out.
Zip

[Nikanit]

I know a crackhead (not a buddy) that wheres a pee device at work in case he randomly gets tested. He uses clean urine from someone else. He wears this device on him all day. My hubs has told me about all the kinda things guys pull off at work sites, I could write a book on it.

[buckbrush]

Originally Posted by Nikanit

I know a crackhead (not a buddy) that wheres a pee device at work in case he randomly gets tested. He uses clean urine from someone else. He wears this device on him all day. My hubs has told me about all the kinda things guys pull off at work sites, I could write a book on it.

So he keeps a fresh supply of clean urine on his body at all times? I will never understand.

[Jim Blake]

Originally Posted by Nikanit

I know a crackhead (not a buddy) that wheres a pee device at work in case he randomly gets tested. He uses clean urine from someone else. He wears this device on him all day. My hubs has told me about all the kinda things guys pull off at work sites, I could write a book on it.

Yes, and there is also synthetic pee that apparently can be bought. I know two "kids" that carry it all the time and they said all they do is warm the vial up with their hands or under hot water in the pee station and dump into the sample container.

[baddog377]

My understanding is that this issue is still very much alive and I believe there was a case that ruled that random testing itself is a violation of a workers charter rights. It was suncor ?

[Nikanit]

Originally Posted by Jim Blake

Yes, and there is also synthetic pee that apparently can be bought. I know two "kids" that carry it all the time and they said all they do is warm the vial up with their hands or under hot water in the pee station and dump into the sample container.

They can detect if it's synthetic apparently by the chemicals in it. We know a guy that tried and failed the test because they found abnormalities.

Best thing is to just not do it like the hubs does. No issues with urine tests.

[Jim Blake]

Originally Posted by Nikanit

They can detect if it's synthetic apparently by the chemicals in it. We know a guy that tried and failed the test because they found abnormalities.

Best thing is to just not do it like the hubs does. No issues with urine tests.

Yes that is the best advice! Unfortunately there are some that just don't get it.

[Jim Blake]

Originally Posted by baddog377

My understanding is that this issue is still very much alive and I believe there was a case that ruled that random testing itself is a violation of a workers charter rights. It was suncor ?

Last I heard it was overturned in Suncor's favor. Not sure if that still stands or not. I am sure someone on here that works there could chime in and clarify.

[bat119]

The problem: Smoke dope on Saturday and you will fail a test on Monday even though the effects have long passed a person could lose their job stone cold sober for something done legally on their own time.
Employers don't own people they only rent, they can't tell you not to drink on your own time why should they be able tell you can't smoke.

The only solution is to not to smoke until the witch hunt ends.

[JDK71]

yes suncore is doing random testing now

[baddog377]

Originally Posted by Jim Blake

Last I heard it was overturned in Suncor's favor. Not sure if that still stands or not. I am sure someone on here that works there could chime in and clarify.

Yes I believe you are correct, and the supreme court refused to give a final judgment on the issue.

[kritz]

Originally Posted by Xbolt7mm

What about medical purposes, im surprised this one has not been challenged yet, we talk about this one at work often wondering when it will be. Now remember that booze is legal and you can not be under the influence at work which obviously makes sence, but the medical use of pot will be an issue, someday someone will scream discrimination because they need pot for a disability so they can work, its coming fer sure.

The company policies will state that if you are taking it medically it is your responsibility to notify you employer. They would then move you to a non safety sensitive position. Again it will be YOUR responsibility to notify them, if you don't , you are out of luck.

[does it ALL outdoors]

Originally Posted by Nikanit

They can detect if it's synthetic apparently by the chemicals in it. We know a guy that tried and failed the test because they found abnormalities.

That's a wife's tale, it's not detectable. It's what Can/Am uses to calibrate their instruments with.

An abnormality could mean a lot of things. And I mean a LOT of different things.

[Red Bullets]

I just wish that there was a D&A testing policy for physicians and important medical staff let alone the oilfield staff.

Regarding one of the two year old posts on this thread.. Cat mentioned Filipinos working on the rigs. Cat should know that there are more people of Asian descent than European descent in Canada now. More and more trades and professions reflect this.

[Hilgy]

Originally Posted by bat119

The problem: Smoke dope on Saturday and you will fail a test on Monday even though the effects have long passed a person could lose their job stone cold sober for something done legally on their own time.
Employers don't own people they only rent, they can't tell you not to drink on your own time why should they be able tell you can't smoke.

The only solution is to not to smoke until the witch hunt ends.

That's the great thing about being an employer. You get to chose who you employ. Want a job at a certain place? There may be a contract to sign like at the place I work. It states if you test positive for "xyz" you don't work here anymore. Doesn't matter whether "xzy" is legal or not. You sign the contract you play by the rules. If you don't like the rules I'm sure there's somebody else looking for help.

I've never once had anyone hold a gun to my head and make me take a job. Its all about the choices you make and the chances you are willing to take. I get paid well and enjoy my job so the choices I make are in line with the rules of said job.

If you lose a job because you were smoking weed and tested positive 3 weeks after you used, that's on you. You made the choice and took the chance knowing it goes against the contract you signed.

[ditch donkey]

Originally Posted by bat119

The problem: Smoke dope on Saturday and you will fail a test on Monday even though the effects have long passed a person could lose their job stone cold sober for something done legally on their own time.
Employers don't own people they only rent, they can't tell you not to drink on your own time why should they be able tell you can't smoke.

The only solution is to not to smoke until the witch hunt ends.

They don’t tell you not to smoke pot on your time off. They couldn’t care less what an employee does on their spare time. But, when you start work, you can not have drugs or alcohol in your system.

If someone smokes on Saturday, and they test positive for THC on Monday, how can they not be impaired if THC is still in their system? I’ve asked many pot smokers that question and all they do is get mad, and say it’s a BS policy. No clear answer.

[bat119]

Originally Posted by ditch donkey

If someone smokes on Saturday, and they test positive for THC on Monday, how can they not be impaired if THC is still in their system? I’ve asked many pot smokers that question and all they do is get mad, and say it’s a BS policy. No clear answer.

Don't ask the pot smokers and the experts can't answer that either

Despite its ability to measure THC levels in the body, such testing does not reliably measure impairment, VanBuskirk says. Cannabis stays in the body for varying lengths of time depending on several factors, including how much cannabis is used and how frequently it’s used. So, the issue concerning what extent THC levels correlate with impairment is undetermined.

https://www.cos-mag.com/cannabis/386...is-impairment/

Like I said the only way to be sure not to fall in the witch hunt is not to partake maybe some day the "experts" will figure it out.

Cannabis isn't like alcohol where science has determined a limit .04 a person is not impaired but still has alcohol in their system.

[Jigger]

Originally Posted by ditch donkey

They don’t tell you not to smoke pot on your time off. They couldn’t care less what an employee does on their spare time. But, when you start work, you can not have drugs or alcohol in your system.

If someone smokes on Saturday, and they test positive for THC on Monday, how can they not be impaired if THC is still in their system? I’ve asked many pot smokers that question and all they do is get mad, and say it’s a BS policy. No clear answer.

Lmao wow that must be some potent weed. The answer is quite simple actually, and has already been shared in this thread. Google also has the answers.

[The Elkster]

Originally Posted by Hilgy

That's the great thing about being an employer. You get to chose who you employ. Want a job at a certain place? There may be a contract to sign like at the place I work. It states if you test positive for "xyz" you don't work here anymore. Doesn't matter whether "xzy" is legal or not. You sign the contract you play by the rules. If you don't like the rules I'm sure there's somebody else looking for help.

I've never once had anyone hold a gun to my head and make me take a job. Its all about the choices you make and the chances you are willing to take. I get paid well and enjoy my job so the choices I make are in line with the rules of said job.

If you lose a job because you were smoking weed and tested positive 3 weeks after you used, that's on you. You made the choice and took the chance knowing it goes against the contract you signed.

An employer can ask you to sign anything in a contract but that doesn't mean it is actually legal or enforceable. And that stretch it does happen regularly. That's why many contracts are regularly challenged in court.

I can ask you to sign a contract that says no heterosexuals or gays on my worksite and you or someone else out of desperation for a job might sign it. However regardless of signature on a dotted line that doesn't mean I can legally fire you if proof comes to light that you did engage in said legal sexual activity. Employers are bound by rules too...and always should be. Plenty of slimy underhanded non-self regulating employers out there.

[jbrow397]

This fine. Nothing to see here. Move along....cant possibly affect job performance.

https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/pub/.../54861-eng.htm

[FishOutOfWater]

Originally Posted by ditch donkey

If someone smokes on Saturday, and they test positive for THC on Monday, how can they not be impaired if THC is still in their system ?

Because most-to-all urine tests for marijuana, will detect the drug in the "average" person who is an occasional/social/weekend user... Wait for it.


UP TO 21-30 DAYS AFTER LAST USE !!!

Yes, 3-4 weeks after last using pot the test will come back positive. Is someone still high 3 weeks later, hell, even a week ?

* average is usually denoted by people with a BMI of 18.5 - 25, as THC indicators are stored in fat cells.
Meaning the more overweight you are, the more likely the indicators will still be there (for a longer period of time).

Some medical companies offer oral test kits now, which supposedly have a shorter "test window" it will indicate positive for (24 hrs I think).

[RandyBoBandy]

Originally Posted by FishOutOfWater

Because most-to-all urine tests for marijuana, will detect the drug in the "average" person who is an occasional/social/weekend user... Wait for it.


UP TO 21-30 DAYS AFTER LAST USE !!!

Yes, 3-4 weeks after last using pot the test will come back positive. Is someone still high 3 weeks later, hell, even a week ?

* average is usually denoted by people with a BMI of 18.5 - 25, as THC indicators are stored in fat cells.
Meaning the more overweight you are, the more likely the indicators will still be there (for a longer period of time).

Some medical companies offer oral test kits now, which supposedly have a shorter "test window" it will indicate positive for (24 hrs I think).

Well well, if guys like 1899 and me that have BMI's of 5..no chance of THC getting caught in our 3 fat cells in our temples

[Hilgy]

Originally Posted by The Elkster

An employer can ask you to sign anything in a contract but that doesn't mean it is actually legal or enforceable. And that stretch it does happen regularly. That's why many contracts are regularly challenged in court.

I can ask you to sign a contract that says no heterosexuals or gays on my worksite and you or someone else out of desperation for a job might sign it. However regardless of signature on a dotted line that doesn't mean I can legally fire you if proof comes to light that you did engage in said legal sexual activity. Employers are bound by rules too...and always should be. Plenty of slimy underhanded non-self regulating employers out there.

Hahaha did you really just use being gay as a choice someone makes the same way they would chose to smoke weed? The contract you posed is discrimination. There’s a HUGE differerence. If you don’t see the difference then this isn’t worth discussing with you.

I work for one of the largest oilfield service companies in the world who is for sure the leader in CYA and it has been re enforced serval times from HQ that regardless of what is legal in Canada the contract we signed is still in effect.

There’s a simple solution though, just find a gig where they don’t care what’s in your system when you show up.

[ditch donkey]

The tests I do for work are the typical 5 panel test, and breathilzer. Do they test for THC indicators, or for THC?