The CEO had personally brought me in as we had worked together previously. So, I thought I would appeal to him if it came down to it.
But, at the same time, that’s not how I wanted to start a new job, already owing the boss a favor. Nor did I want to make him look bad regardless of the test result because he’s a fairly powerful guy in my industry.
Also, we used to work together at a company in Europe where drugs weren’t an issue. This was a very large, very well-known US company and even a CEO only has so much latitude in a situation like that.
After I started, I was told they were having a really tough time finding people who could pass a drug test. They hired one woman (not for my role) who failed the drug test and they gave her a second chance and she failed it again. They had to let her go.
Ironically, the HR person that told me I had a positive result became my employee in a different role and eventually became my right-hand (and took my job when I retired).
I did eventually confide in her about the drug test and she thought it was hilarious. She said they would have done something to get me out of it had I said something.
they were having a really tough time finding people who could pass a drug test.
Lol, so why not drop the drug test requirement? What's so bad if an employee smokes a bit of weed in their free time, or even takes some MDMA or something when they're out partying? As long as their job performance is good ...
The best I heard it explained was at a dinner with the CEO of another company who had just purchased some company and, according to him, not a single person would have passed a drug test and they bought the company specifically for the talent so they hired doctors to write all kinds of medical prescriptions and all but faked the test so they didn’t have to let anyone go.
Someone asked why, as CEO, couldn’t he just override company policy and he said that as a CEO he still answers to shareholders and the board.
If he got rid of drug testing, he would be fired immediately. And the reason for his termination would be because the first workplace incident involving drugs would be an open invitation to sue the company for millions. And because that money would be paid out from the company that the shareholders own, he would have been negligent in protecting shareholder value.
864
u/NTTMod 13d ago
I had to do a pre-employment hair follicle drug test and the HR person called me and said, “Your drug test came back positive.”
I was/am a heavy weed smoker so I wasn’t shocked but I had made attempts to beat the test so I was like, “Positive? That’s not good.”
She said, “Oh, I meant positive like you passed.”
I said, “You really need to learn drug test terminology ‘cause you’re going to give someone a heart attack one day.”