Using legal pot on own time fireable offense - Colorado Court Ruling

[MadDogs]

If you really want to know …

I really don’t. It was a rhetorical question in a failed attempt to mock why you would phrase whether or not I was “okay” with how employers handle those that smoke weed when I was stating how employers look at such.

…you don't pay an employee to control their actions while off the clock (especially if those actions are perfectly legal) … Is it morally right for a company to fire a punctual, team-player who does their job well for something they are legally doing while off the clock?

Again, if said actions “off the clock” can reduce productivity, raise insurance costs or if they have a policy in play stating such then the employer has a valid reason. Secondly, until weed is rescheduled it is not “perfectly legal”.

 

[Coded-Dude]

Anything and everything a person does that is not work related has the potential to reduce productivity. Simply getting married can reduce productivity.....you'll spend too much time daydreaming about your newly wed, that baby on the way, or the new house you are hoping to buy, etc. All that lost focus could cause and accident and raise insurance rates. Is that an appropriate fire-able offense(getting married)? I asked your position(on similar situations; alcohol, tobacco, etc.), because it would appear you are okay with the actions of the company in controlling their employees private lives. I know you haven't stated one way or the other, only that what the company did was within their rights, legally.

 

[donner]

Again, if said actions “off the clock” can reduce productivity, raise insurance costs or if they have a policy in play stating such then the employer has a valid reason. Secondly, until weed is rescheduled it is not “perfectly legal”.

Where would that end, though? As Coded points out, there are any number of things that you do 'off the clock' that could damage your productivity at work. Simply not getting enough sleep could, in theory, cost your employer.

Now, there are jobs that 'require' certain off-the-clock concessions. Airline pilots cannot drink X hours before flying, which does seem reasonable. But that is not an outright ban and is clearly laid out ahead of time and had direct implications on the pilot's job beyond the possibility of 'lost productivity'.

To take your argument farther, there are several ways that shooting guns could cause an employee harm. Aside from NDs, lead exposure, hearing damage, etc could all impact an employee's productivity and/or lead to higher insurance costs for an employer. Should your company be able to tell you you cannot own a firearm?

How about sending a personal email from your personal phone while at work? Should your employer be able to demand access to your personal phone and email because they suspect you were cutting into 'productivity' by sending an email on their time?

I'm all for the rights of an employer, but where is the line in your scenario.

 

[TedKennedy]

We once had a CEO- (We're a several thousand employee co.) he publicly stated that he'd like to see the day when our company wouldn't hire smokers. He reasoned that health care costs, missed work, justified his statement.

He was/is a first rate arrogant jerk, and I'm glad I no longer see him. And no, I don't smoke.

 

[TenBears]

I think companies forcing you to deposit your precious bodily fluids in to a jar is an invasion of privacy, I'm sure that's only me and general jack t. Ripper though.

 

[sh00ter]

I think companies forcing you to deposit your precious bodily fluids in to a jar is an invasion of privacy, I'm sure that's only me and general jack t. Ripper though.

That's a tough one...what about for welfare (as a state law)? Of course u are talking private sector here so not same I guess.

 

[sh00ter]

We once had a CEO- (We're a several thousand employee co.) he publicly stated that he'd like to see the day when our company wouldn't hire smokers. He reasoned that health care costs, missed work, justified his statement.

He was/is a first rate arrogant jerk, and I'm glad I no longer see him. And no, I don't smoke.

I also do not smoke and have a condition where 2nd hand smoke hurts me more than you. But I support people's right to smoke as long as not actively hurting others. For example, a smokers in line at the bank is actively injuring others...I can still own a 2-stroke weed eater too but I can't run it inside a McDonalds LOL...I understand why the CEO thought that way; it is people choosing to do something they know is harmful and then expect others to pay for their bills after it harms them. However, like Donner said, where does it end? Perhaps the CEO himself eats lots of junk food...maybe you could tell him his immune system will be suppressed by sugar and he is a hypocrite LOL.

This is a tough one though because part of me wants the PRIVATE sector to be able to run their own operation as long as not hurting someone. If there are other jobs, would a guy who only wanted to hire non-smokers be exercising his freedom to do so?

 

[TenBears]

For entry physicals or after an accident of some type, that's fine, Random ua's as a fishing expedition are bs. Just my opinion, which counts for shite.

 

[Shadowrider]

This is more than I would have guessed.

I suspect it's actually higher than this shows, WHO says 2.5 million per year worldwide.

Alcohol is responsible for about 88,000 deaths in the U.S. each year, according to a new government report on the toll of excessive drinking.
Source

 

[RidgeHunter]

We once had a CEO- (We're a several thousand employee co.) he publicly stated that he'd like to see the day when our company wouldn't hire smokers. He reasoned that health care costs, missed work, justified his statement.

He was/is a first rate arrogant jerk, and I'm glad I no longer see him. And no, I don't smoke.

Fat people are a protected class in America though. We'll go after the drinkers, the smokers, and the dopers in the name of "productivity" but nearly every person I work with that has a semi-sedentary job (and I travel a good bit) has every bit of 40+ pounds to lose and lives on pop, candy, and chips.

Notice the one sin tax conservatives freak out about most is taxing soda. Lawl.

I say we take it all the way. Black or white. Companies can chose to be "healthy" or "unhealthy". If you want to ban smoking and doping, your employees also need a minimum of 6 hours of cardio a week and must fall in an acceptable BMI range. Otherwise you lose your Healthy Company endorsement and firing people for substance use becomes illegal. Healthy companies can fire smokers, couch potatoes, fatties, Catholics after communion, whoever.

Then we'd all have a choice about where to work. Simplicity. Eliminate cognitive dissonance. Chi.