1. We are currently experiencing issues with viewing and uploading images, our team is working on the issue.
    Dismiss Notice

Use of medical marijuana at work poses challenges for employers: experts

Discussion in 'Canadian Patients' started by VIANARCHRIS, Sep 23, 2015.

  1.  
    VIANARCHRIS

    VIANARCHRIS Well-Known Member

    Is that right? Now you get to explain how and why you have accused me of making false claims or do you enjoy being an embarrassment to the human race? You don't know what went down, you don't even know the location of the camp, but you somehow reached the conclusion that it is a 'false claim'? The fact that it is Scout's Canada seems to be a sticking point to you - yet you refuse to say why. Could it be YOU are also a Scout leader and you don't want any negative press that would expose your relationships with the little boys? You sick fucking perv.
     
  2.  
    The Hippy

    The Hippy Well-Known Member

    Why are you interested so much in violence? Have you been in a lot of fights in your life?
     
    gb123 likes this.
  3.  
    TwistedToker

    TwistedToker Well-Known Member

    Now gb127 thinks this is a fucking dating site. He's pm'ing me to 'meet and hang out'. FREAK
     
  4.  
    gb123

    gb123 Well-Known Member

    He's harassing @WHATFG by following her around the site as well...
     
  5.  
    VIANARCHRIS

    VIANARCHRIS Well-Known Member

    Look! It's gb127's retarded cousin.
     
    GroErr and gb123 like this.
  6.  
    gb123

    gb123 Well-Known Member

     
    cannadan likes this.
  7.  
    greg nr

    greg nr Well-Known Member

    The GBpretender is Dead! Long live the GBpretender. ;)
     
    cannadan, The Hippy and gb123 like this.
  8.  
    SoOLED

    SoOLED Well-Known Member

    why, its just like every other Rx in the work place.

    you cant come to work high on Xanax, or hydrocodone.

    why would cannabis be any different; every work place common guidelines say this. I know most people ignore it, and take their meds anyways. but if something happen, they would fault you for coming to work under Rx meds.

    ..so yeah do it, but its at your own risk if there is a accident or problem it will be your breach or fault.
     
    rocpilefsj likes this.
  9.  
    SoOLED

    SoOLED Well-Known Member


    how is that any different then doing so, with any other S(#) Rx?
     
    VIANARCHRIS likes this.
  10.  
    VIANARCHRIS

    VIANARCHRIS Well-Known Member

    But you can come to work on many other prescription meds and do just fine. At issue would be impairment and how it relates to the job you do. You haven't got a clue what I did or how cannabis use affected my job or even if I had ANY interactions with kids.
     
    Farmer.J, SoOLED and GrowRock like this.
  11.  
    SoOLED

    SoOLED Well-Known Member

    it wouldn't matter, if there was an incident. you would be on the wrong side of what ever health and safety code. there are no half infractions, all it takes is one incident and regardless of your previous performance you'd be just as guilty. I would even go as far to say, stating you been under the influence everyday until the day of incident would be detrimental.

    sounds like the guy who can drive drunk fine, but gets pulled over for a tail light, and even though he wasn't suspect of DUI is now facing DUI charges rather then a fix it ticket.

    I'm speaking from a black book stand point. I could give less fucks what you do, but law is law. no amount of color is going to change what is black and white.
     
    rocpilefsj likes this.
  12.  
    greg nr

    greg nr Well-Known Member

    Part of the issue here is that you can test positive for cannabis use well past 30 days after your last dose, and up to 90 days if they use hair to test.

    The presence of metabolites does not equal impairment. All it detects is that you used cannabis, or a cannabis product, at some point in the past. It doesn't say you are impaired at work.

    A breathalyzer would tell that. Even a positive test for cocaine will only go back 3 days. They are penalizing people for use, not impairment.
     
    gb123, GrowRock, WHATFG and 3 others like this.
  13.  
    Farmer.J

    Farmer.J Well-Known Member

    It's Happy HoresShit Discrimination is all it is.
     
    VIANARCHRIS and gb123 like this.
  14.  
    VIANARCHRIS

    VIANARCHRIS Well-Known Member

    Again, you are making assumptions without knowing the facts. They had their lawyers on it and they sided with me. Don't give any relevance to the troll's postings, he is even less informed. I don't need to go into details with anyone on here - suffice to say I left on my own under good terms more than a year later.
     
    TheRealDman, SoOLED, gb123 and 3 others like this.
  15.  
    SoOLED

    SoOLED Well-Known Member

    but, in not so many words admittingly say it could have turned out different?

    is that how you spell that ad-mit-ting-ly...fuck it you know what I mean.
     
  16.  
    VIANARCHRIS

    VIANARCHRIS Well-Known Member

    No. The only difference would have been my lawyer fees - which were not needed.
     
    SoOLED likes this.
  17.  
    cannadan

    cannadan Well-Known Member

    g1b23=Clone of the day...please try to refrain....like the mods have asked.
     

Share This Page