At Ask Me Help Desk you can ask questions in any topic and have them
answered for free by our experts. To ask questions or participate in
answering them you must register for a free account. By registering you
will be able to:
Get free answers from experts in any of our 300+
topics.
I have just read where Mexico votes to legalize small amounts of cocaine, heroin and marijuana.
What are the implications where American citizens cross the boarder and use what is there legal drugs but would then have traces of the drug in thier system for drug tests in the US. Since they did not do anything illegal by any government law, could they then be held responsible for employee drug tests.
Yes! A positive drug test can get you fired since drugs are illegal in the U.S. But another aspect of Mexico's new policy will be less drug related arrest for small amounts of drugs hmm.........!
Hi, Chuck,
Very good question!
The US Gov't doesn't know what to do with the millions of illegal immigrants in the US now. This only adds to more problems.
My own opinion is that if anyone tests positive in the US for drugs illegal in the US, it's still the same actions by the employer.
Other examples could also apply. If something is legal in another country, then a person is caught doing it in American, where it is illegal, then it's still illegal here.
Best wishes.
i think marjuana should be legalised only. Its not such a harsh drug compared to others and that way the government and police can concentrate on more important issues than just marjuana.
I agree, allthough I do not partake in Smoking, I think our government should focus on more harmful drugs out there such as crack and heroin. I don't think Marijuanna is necessarily bad. I do think that Crack and cocain is. I think if anyone in the U.S. is tested by their employer and crack/cocain, heroin, or any other hard drug is in their system, they should be penalized, even if they did do it in Mexico. The fact is, those drugs are harmful and addictive, and chances are, if they do those type of drugs in Mexico, where it would be legal, then they will do it here. Those are drugs that are immediatly addictive and ruin lives.
the issue here is employment and the perception of what is a right.
for example, a basketball coach was forced out of a job after getting caught in pics drinking with students. technically, the coach did nothing illegal. school thought it put the univ in a bad light... out goes the coach.
a health care company fires all employees who smoke or refuse to take tests to prove wheter they smoke.
NYC's transport union is threatened with a fine of a million dollars a day for the strike that crippled the transport system... declaring the workers protests illegal. this ex isnt the same as the others, since the strikes are banned by law, but the freedom of speech isnt banned. you just risk your job by speaking your mind.
an employer asks all current employees to sign a non compete contract and then fires those who refuse to sign.
so the point is that you are simply not free to do anything, even if it is legal.
many tend to be ignorant of the fact that many times employers do have the right to fire at will. outside of a few things, such as race, gender, religion, age, military leave, your employer does not need to have good cause to fire you.
so while im all for indiv rights... i also understand my rights as an employee and employer. if im a charitable org and i find an employee is engaging in risky behaviour that could hurt the PR of the org, the right to fire will be used if there is no other recourse.
i have absolutely no problem with a company firing employees for the use of an substance that is illegal in this country, even if the use of the substance was in a country that allowed it.
the rights of the employer stretch far beyond that.
While I was a probation officer, one of the Deputies told me that the jail inmates would have a new inmate, that used crystal, pee in a cup. The inmates would then dry the pee on a flat surface, scrape up the residue and snort it. The amount of crystal left in the urine will get them high! That means that the illegal substance is still on their person...even if it is in their person...does it not? When I explained this to one of the judges, he said it would not be too far fetched to dry a urine speciman, scrape it up, test it for drugs and charge for possession. If a person uses illegal drugs in a country where it is legal, then is tested in a country where it is illegal, I would assume they are still under full penalty since the illegal substance is in or on their person,(possession). Also, do you really think your employer would fall for the line, " you can't fire me since I did cocain in Mexico where it was legal? If that were the case, everyone would be doing it! They aint gonna let all that get started!
no. i dont think that. but right and legal are sometimes two different things. just and legal are not always the same. but in this case, i think the employers rights are mostly just.
id be upset if my mother was fired because she works for a health care provider and smokes, for example. but... i dont think the fire at will right that an employer has is necessarily a bad thing. it makes an employee vulnerable and uncomfortable.... but there was NEVER a guarantee of employment in the first place. its not a birth right. it is an opportunity. and sometimes things dont work out.
i know it sounds like im saying the boss is always right. i dont think that... but i dont think that an employer should have to apologize for letting an employee go if they think there is something about that person that in incompatable with the running of the business. its a business.... not a life time meal ticket.
while the boss might not always be right, in many cases the boss HAS that right.
I worked in a union shop for 30 years and the boss had better be right. Taking someones lively hood because the boss feels like it is too much like slavery. Since being in Texas it seems like there are no workers right at all, and everyones happy so who am I to shake the cart. But the boss has a right to make fair and just rules that apply to everyone including testing for drugs.
my father and grandfather were both union. i marched in solidarity parades as a kid, so im not one to say its ok to treat workers poorly or not pay reasonable wages. and firing for meanness and without reasonable cause is dishonorable, but not illegal in most circumstances.
this is an issue where there are just gray areas because laws are meant to be flexible and not written to a specific situation. i would be very uncomfortable with an employer who constantly tests me for drugs... although if i so choose to work in an area that demands it, it is my choice. if ive chosen to make my livlihood in a business environment that im not suited for, then thats my bad decision.
if the boss feels an employee doesnt fit in with the business, if this person may do damage to the business by their conduct, then i think its a crime to make that employer suffer the damage such an employee can make. it impacts the employer and all of the employees as well. ive seen this first hand and everyone in the place was in a much better work environment when that jerk was shown the door. the customers didnt have to suffer the guys attitude, the coworkers all could do their job better. and he was pretty much fired for being an a$$.
so i agree and i dont. there needs to be balance. employees need to be respectful of the business environment and understand the expectations of the employer. the employer needs to be respectful of the employee as well. but id just rather not have a flammable truck being driven by a guy who did coke, under legal circumstances or not.
Linear Mode
