Wal-Mart Wrong or right?

[PPSTATEBOUND]

http://www.news.com.au/business/business-smarts/wal-mart-worker-joseph-casias-fired-for-legally-using-medical-*********/story-e6frfm9r-1225842273920

[ronwx5x]

Michigan is one of 14 states which allow legal *********. In MI it may be taken for a "debilitating" disease, and cancer is specifically listed. The question then becomes, can or should an employer require that if a person uses legal MJ, should he be required to report it to his employer? Then of course, the question becomes if MJ must be reported, why not other drugs?

WalMart is going to look bad no matter what they do. They need a policy spelling out what the rules are. In the absence of a policy other than just no drugs allowed, they might lose this one. Glad I don't have to decide!

I personally doubt that using MJ really does much to help the symptoms or even really dulls the pain. Should he be allowed to smoke on the job?

Tough decision.

[Old Dog]

Looks like WalMarts actions could be considered unconstitutional.............any thoughts along that line?

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by ronwx5x


I personally doubt that using MJ really does much to help the symptoms or even really dulls the pain.



Most studies show that it works better than pain pills to control pain in certain situations

[Phil C]

SOME COMPASSION BY WAL-MART!

:mad:

[Phil C]

I remember about 25 years ago I went into the Wal-Mart in Sinton and they had a big sign near the front that bragged how they only used American products to help keep Americans in jobs blah blah.

I picked up and item and right away saw a Made In China label on it. Kind of an ironic lie and hypocrisy or at least some misleading information.

[SintonFan]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
Most studies show that it works better than pain pills to control pain in certain situations

Studies from Monterrey Tech?:D

[sinton66]

If Michigan has a state labor board, odds are Wal-Mart will be hearing from them.

[MUSTANG69]

Originally posted by Phil C
I remember about 25 years ago I went into the Wal-Mart in Sinton and they had a big sign near the front that bragged how they only used American products to help keep Americans in jobs blah blah.

I picked up and item and right away saw a Made In China label on it. Kind of an ironic lie and hypocrisy or at least some misleading information.

The big change to foreign products really started when the old man died. I think his name was Sam Walton.

[ASUFrisbeeStud]

Originally posted by MUSTANG69
The big change to foreign products really started when the old man died. I think his name was Sam Walton.

Things really changed after his death in alot of other ways too.

[BullsFan]

I met Sam Walton yeeeears ago when I worked at the local Walmart while I was in college. Still have the commerative Coke bottles he handed out to the employees. I keep thinking I'll check to see how much that thing is worth one of these days.

(To put in in perspective, not only was Walmart not open 24 hours at this time, it wasn't open at all on Sundays because of blue laws. And we punched in every department and price--no scanners.)

My understanding of medical mj is not so much that it's used as an analgesic. For cancer patients undergoing chemo, not only does it quell nausea associated with that treatment, it actually acts as an appetite stimulant so people are able to eat. Many cancer patients become gaunt and even emaciated. I'm watching someone go through chemo now, and she's gotten painfully thin, so much so that she looks as if a good stiff wind would carry her off. If having medical mj would help with that, help her eat and keep her strength up....well, I wish I'd lobbied for it in Texas years ago.

ETA: linkage: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medical_cannabis

[AP Panther Fan]

It will be interesting to see how this one turns out.

I could understand the termination if he were under the influence at work, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Being the cynic that I am, I question whether WalMart simply did not want the their group medical taking a large hit in the treatment of his cancer. Horrible thought, but possible.

[ronwx5x]

Originally posted by AP Panther Fan
It will be interesting to see how this one turns out.

I could understand the termination if he were under the influence at work, but that doesn't seem to be the case.

Being the cynic that I am, I question whether WalMart simply did not want the their group medical taking a large hit in the treatment of his cancer. Horrible thought, but possible.

I'm confused. How would smoking MJ cause their group medical to take a large hit?:doh:

[AP Panther Fan]

Originally posted by ronwx5x
I'm confused. How would smoking MJ cause their group medical to take a large hit?:doh:

It's not the smoking MJ, it is having a cancer patient on their group medical plan. It was the cancer treatment costs that I was referring to. Sorry that wasn't very clear. If it's any consolation, I even confuse myself rather often.:p :)

[injuredinmelee]

maybe if he would have talked with human resources and informed them of his decision to use a drug that went against corporate policy this could of all been avoided. Maybe they would of made some sort of policy adaptation for him but instead he hid it from his employer and now he is out of work. Oh well.

[sinton66]

Originally posted by injuredinmelee
maybe if he would have talked with human resources and informed them of his decision to use a drug that went against corporate policy this could of all been avoided. Maybe they would of made some sort of policy adaptation for him but instead he hid it from his employer and now he is out of work. Oh well.

I think the point here is that Mighigan State Law says it's okay. If the law allows it, seems like it might be normal to think it's okay without checking with anybody. That's what I was saying about the state labor board.

[injuredinmelee]

Originally posted by sinton66
I think the point here is that Mighigan State Law says it's okay. If the law allows it, seems like it might be normal to think it's okay without checking with anybody. That's what I was saying about the state labor board.
I disagree. My state allows alcohol to be consumed but I cant consume it at work.

[SintonFan]

Originally posted by injuredinmelee
I disagree. My state allows alcohol to be consumed but I cant consume it at work.

Can you get prescription-strength Jack Daniels? :thinking:

[big daddy russ]

Originally posted by injuredinmelee
I disagree. My state allows alcohol to be consumed but I cant consume it at work.
I disagree. Most jobs I've worked have had Ny-Quil sitting on the first aid counter. Isn't that alcohol being used in the same manner as medicinal *********?

[Daddy D 11]

Whole country is screwed up so damn bad...

[PPSTATEBOUND]

Originally posted by injuredinmelee
I disagree. My state allows alcohol to be consumed but I cant consume it at work.

If you read the link it states he did not use the MJ during work hours. So how would you fell about getting fired for drinking a brew after you punched out?:eek:

[Farmersfan]

I disagree with the entire idea that you can be fired for a drug test of any kind unless it proves impairment while on the job. What a person does at home is none of the employers business.

On this subject though I also understand that the use of MJ for cancer patients is to increase appetite and help with nausea during chemo. I have not seen any real proof of pain reduction while using it............ There are other drugs for the pain.

[NateDawg39]

As a quality manager and seeing how I have an HSE working for me, I will drug test anyone I feel needs it and will fire anyone for alcohol or drugs in their body. To many people work for me and to much money going through my company to allow something bad to happen.

Safety first.

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
I disagree with the entire idea that you can be fired for a drug test of any kind unless it proves impairment while on the job. What a person does at home is none of the employers business.
Remember this the next time you are on a flight and wonder if the pilot might have been smoking crack the day before. Personally I would like my pilots to be crack free.

[PPSTATEBOUND]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
As a quality manager and seeing how I have an HSE working for me, I will drug test anyone I feel needs it and will fire anyone for alcohol or drugs in their body. To many people work for me and to much money going through my company to allow something bad to happen.

Safety first.


LOL.....I have a house made with Starphire glass windows and shoot any bird I see legally flying or not. ....way much money invested to allow something bad to happen.:rolleyes:

[BullsFan]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
As a quality manager and seeing how I have an HSE working for me, I will drug test anyone I feel needs it and will fire anyone for alcohol or drugs in their body. To many people work for me and to much money going through my company to allow something bad to happen.

Safety first.

What if someone has prescription drugs which a doctor has said are medically necessary? What if you were in a state where medical maryjane is legal? You going to fire that cancer victim because he's been smoking some weed?

I'm not trying to be a smart aleck; I'm really genuinely curious. My first inclination is that if it's medically necessary you shouldn't do it, but if you have a job where people's safety depends on you...well, I hope if my pilot is a cancer victim who needs the medical mj then he just takes a leave of absence.

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by JasperDog94
Remember this the next time you are on a flight and wonder if the pilot might have been smoking crack the day before. Personally I would like my pilots to be crack free.





Crack use yesterday does not neccessarily mean impairment or inability to do the job today. Pay special attention to those two terms, "Impairment" and "on the job". If you want to test for impairment then I would not have a problem but to ASSUME a person who does drugs on his personal time is not capable is about as big a violation of personal rights as has ever been discussed on this board.
How would you feel if your employer decided to go smoke-free and started testing you to see if you smoke on your off time?

[BullsFan]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
Crack use yesterday does not neccessarily mean impairment or inability to do the job today. Pay special attention to those two terms, "Impairment" and "on the job". If you want to test for impairment then I would not have a problem but to ASSUME a person who does drugs on his personal time is not capable is about as big a violation of personal rights as has ever been discussed on this board.
How would you feel if your employer decided to go smoke-free and started testing you to see if you smoke on your off time?

I'm sorry--how do you determine impairment? Do a reflex test? Have them walk the line? Put him/her in a car and see if they wreck?

How much crack can you take before you're impaired, anyway? How much white stuff or crank? How about maryjane?

As far as I'm concerned, better safe than sorry when it comes to safety.

[NateDawg39]

Originally posted by BullsFan
What if someone has prescription drugs which a doctor has said are medically necessary? What if you were in a state where medical maryjane is legal? You going to fire that cancer victim because he's been smoking some weed?

I'm not trying to be a smart aleck; I'm really genuinely curious. My first inclination is that if it's medically necessary you shouldn't do it, but if you have a job where people's safety depends on you...well, I hope if my pilot is a cancer victim who needs the medical mj then he just takes a leave of absence. If he or she "needs" MJ, then they have no place in my construction yard. It's a tough life but thats the truth. If MJ is legal in my state then I fire anyone who uses it based on safety concerns.

[sinton66]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
If he or she "needs" MJ, then they have no place in my construction yard. It's a tough life but thats the truth. If MJ is legal in my state then I fire anyone who uses it based on safety concerns.

Again, the article says he didn't use it at work. MJ's effects are not long lasting.

[BullsFan]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
If he or she "needs" MJ, then they have no place in my construction yard. It's a tough life but thats the truth. If MJ is legal in my state then I fire anyone who uses it based on safety concerns.

If it's legal and needed (not "needed") and the person is only using it at home, you're setting yourself up for a heckuva lawsuit.

[Txbroadcaster]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by NateDawg39
If he or she "needs" MJ, then they have no place in my construction yard. It's a tough life but thats the truth. If MJ is legal in my state then I fire anyone who uses it based on safety concerns. [/QUOTE

better fire anyone that eats to much junk food..dont want someone being unsafe because they have a heart attack at work

[NateDawg39]

Originally posted by BullsFan
If it's legal and needed (not "needed") and the person is only using it at home, you're setting yourself up for a heckuva lawsuit. If it endangers the lives of 236 men and women that work for me I will get rid of anyone who breaks company policy and when they sign the signature area when I hire them, they sign away their right to use drugs and alcohol and if they are caught they are terminated.

Like I said...its a tough life.

[NateDawg39]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
[QUOTE]Originally posted by NateDawg39
If he or she "needs" MJ, then they have no place in my construction yard. It's a tough life but thats the truth. If MJ is legal in my state then I fire anyone who uses it based on safety concerns. [/QUOTE

better fire anyone that eats to much junk food..dont want someone being unsafe because they have a heart attack at work If you were in my position you might actually understand how the system works. I make sure drilling rigs are built properly. I am an engineer. I have the power to decide who works and who does not. If you can't weld you won't work for the company. If you can't fit pipe, you won't work. If you can't use auto cad, you won't be a designer. Simple fact is, I make the decisions and I get things done like I was trained to do and like I am told to do. I am 23 years old but I have seen a lot of people go down from drug use. I am not afraid to give them the boot if they aren't able to work for my company and their policies. Thats why they get paid big money, they are good at their trade and they don't mess with crap like drugs.

[NateDawg39]

Originally posted by sinton66
Again, the article says he didn't use it at work. MJ's effects are not long lasting. True, but my job is to enforce company policy. The policy states:
no employee shall use illegal drugs or alcohol during employment period. If prescription drugs are required, the duties of the hired employee will be discussed in a formal manner with relative parties required for such discussion and if need be, the employee will be terminated if the employee's trade is of safety concern to other employee's on the current job.


Thats not an exact quote but it is pretty dang close and I have fired 2 people for having MJ and another drug in their body when I tested them.

[sinton66]

The key word is "illegal". Still is in Texas, not so in Michigan.

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by BullsFan
I'm sorry--how do you determine impairment? Do a reflex test? Have them walk the line? Put him/her in a car and see if they wreck?

How much crack can you take before you're impaired, anyway? How much white stuff or crank? How about maryjane?

As far as I'm concerned, better safe than sorry when it comes to safety.




Wow!
Are you aware of how many different ways you could be discrimminated against in the name of "better safe than sorry"?

[PPSTATEBOUND]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
True, but my job is to enforce company policy. The policy states:
no employee shall use illegal drugs or alcohol during employment period. If prescription drugs are required, the duties of the hired employee will be discussed in a formal manner with relative parties required for such discussion and if need be, the employee will be terminated if the employee's trade is of safety concern to other employee's on the current job.



Thats not an exact quote but it is pretty dang close and I have fired 2 people for having MJ and another drug in their body when I tested them.

Serious question, do you test daily, weekly, monthly or only out of suspision?, and being the safety advocate you claim to be did you test every single emplyee the day after the Superbowl for alchohol?

[MUSTANG69]

Originally posted by sinton66
The key word is "illegal". Still is in Texas, not so in Michigan.

Legal drugs (over the counter or prescription) can impair a person's ability to work safely. If they endanger themselves or other employees then a change has to be made. You either find a new position for them or you let them go.

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by MUSTANG69
Legal drugs (over the counter or prescription) can impair a person's ability to work safely. If they endanger themselves or other employees then a change has to be made. You either find a new position for them or you let them go.



The key word word in your statement is "CAN"! Doesn't it make sense that an employer should have to prove that an employees ability "IS" impaired before terminating them???? The list of things that "CAN" impair an employees ability goes waaaaayyyyyyy beyond just drugs.

[NateDawg39]

Originally posted by PPSTATEBOUND
Serious question, do you test daily, weekly, monthly or only out of suspision?, and being the safety advocate you claim to be did you test every single emplyee the day after the Superbowl for alchohol? I tested them the day they were hired and when I am asked to do so by my HSE.

Ok and here is my position. I have people working with cranes, man lifts, scaffolding, hydro static testing, argon gas, guys in harness carriers....so yeah my position is pretty clear on the subject I would think.

[MUSTANG69]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
The key word word in your statement is "CAN"! Doesn't it make sense that an employer should have to prove that an employees ability "IS" impaired before terminating them???? The list of things that "CAN" impair an employees ability goes waaaaayyyyyyy beyond just drugs.

You are exactly right. You can not just make a random judgement that a person is impaired. If an employee is doing something that is unsafe whether it be drugs or just in a manner that is not responsible then you need to do something. An employer must be fair in the actions they take either by testing or consultation with the employee.

[BullsFan]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
Wow!
Are you aware of how many different ways you could be discrimminated against in the name of "better safe than sorry"?

Are you aware of how many ways you can be discriminated against in determining how exactly impaired you are? Impairment is a subjective thing, far more so than a drug test.

Or for that matter, are you aware of how many ways people can be killed or injured by people who have taken drugs of any kind? Do you trust your safety to the pilot who lit up a doobie a few hours before flight time? In those cases, I'd take the potential for discrimination over the potential for death any day.

[BullsFan]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
Thats not an exact quote but it is pretty dang close and I have fired 2 people for having MJ and another drug in their body when I tested them.

I'm guessing their mj wasn't deemed medically necessary. ;)

In all seriousness, I just wonder what would happen if you had someone with a true, serious medical condition that required some drug and you fired them for taking that drug. I would think that'd be lawsuit city.

[Pick6]

There was a man from Whitesboro a week or so ago who was driving his car and hit 2 road crew workers. They had to be careflighted to Dallas. They are in bad shape. The reason the man hit them is because he was on prescription meds and passed out from taking them. So yes, medically necessary drugs can be a safety hazard also.

[NateDawg39]

Originally posted by BullsFan
I'm guessing their mj wasn't deemed medically necessary. ;)

In all seriousness, I just wonder what would happen if you had someone with a true, serious medical condition that required some drug and you fired them for taking that drug. I would think that'd be lawsuit city. When they sign the dotted line they sign off that they won't use drugs and if it is a medical requirement, then I have the responsibility to let them go for safety concern if need be.

[SintonFan]

Nate, I agree with you.
In fact, more so.
MJ has bad long and short term effects on the body, mind and reflexes so just do your job. You have a great responsibility.

[PPSTATEBOUND]

Originally posted by SintonFan
Nate, I agree with you.
In fact, more so.
MJ has bad long and short term effects on the body, mind and reflexes so just do your job. You have a great responsibility.

LOL..well that couldn't be more clear...I mean heck didnt our fearless leader inhale and frequently.... :eek:

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by SintonFan
Nate, I agree with you.
In fact, more so.
MJ has bad long and short term effects on the body, mind and reflexes so just do your job. You have a great responsibility.



Yea, I agree! Let's make our employers the Police for our off hours activities that harm our health and then we can do away with the REAL police!

[PPSTATEBOUND]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
When they sign the dotted line they sign off that they won't use drugs and if it is a medical requirement, then I have the responsibility to let them go for safety concern if need be.

So Big Nate...in all seriousness..how many employees would you have had to let go if you would have tested everyone including yourself for alcohol the Monday after the Superbowl? I know you prolly didnt test that day, but would assume their were some with levels still in their blood did your little operation have any accidents that day?

[ronwx5x]

It seems that WalMart is within their rights to fire employees who use medical MJ. I'm not sure it will stop lawsuits, but those who sue are at a disadvantage, according to this attorney.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/03/24/michigan.medical.*********.fired/index.html?hpt=T2

[NateDawg39]

Originally posted by PPSTATEBOUND
So Big Nate...in all seriousness..how many employees would you have had to let go if you would have tested everyone including yourself for alcohol the Monday after the Superbowl? I know you prolly didnt test that day, but would assume their were some with levels still in their blood did your little operation have any accidents that day? Well I don't drink alcohol anymore so I would have been clean. I don't think you really understand the argument your attempting to make.

Please let me know what it is exactly your trying to defend because all I am seeing is someone trying to prove they don't approve of a safe work place.

[PPSTATEBOUND]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
Well I don't drink alcohol anymore so I would have been clean. I don't think you really understand the argument your attempting to make.

Please let me know what it is exactly your trying to defend because all I am seeing is someone trying to prove they don't approve of a safe work place.

I'm not defending anything, and asking a question is not my way of arguing...I was just asking if a work place and boss that that advocates a safe work place, and also said he would fire anyone with alcohol in their system while on the job...if they/you tested their employeess for a substance that has a very serious effect on ones job skills the morning after. Seems like a alcohol test would have turned up numerous unsafe employees that day. I think I would have dropped the hammer on them.

[NateDawg39]

Originally posted by PPSTATEBOUND
I'm not defending anything, and asking a question is not my way of arguing...I was just asking if a work place and boss that that advocates a safe work place, and also said he would fire anyone with alcohol in their system while on the job...if they/you tested their employeess for a substance that has a very serious effect on ones job skills the morning after. Seems like a alcohol test would have turned up numerous unsafe employees that day. I think I would have dropped the hammer on them. Politics play a role as well. One has to get proper authorization and some other things in line first.

Plus, we did not work that day. Or the day after that if I remember correctly

[PPSTATEBOUND]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
Politics play a role as well. One has to get proper authorization and some other things in line first.

Plus, we did not work that day. Or the day after that if I remember correctly


Thanks Nate.

[Phantom Stang]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
As a quality manager and seeing how I have an HSE working for me, I will drug test anyone I feel needs it and will fire anyone for alcohol or drugs in their body. To many people work for me and to much money going through my company to allow something bad to happen.

Safety first.
Nate, does your company's policy state that there can be ABSOLUTELY NO TRACES of alcohol, prescription pain killers, over the counter cold and sinus medicines, or any other substances that could impair ones ability to work safely?
If so, does this apply to every single job title in your company?:thinking:

[SintonFan]

Originally posted by PPSTATEBOUND
LOL..well that couldn't be more clear...I mean heck didnt our fearless leader inhale and frequently.... :eek:

Clarity is good.:D

[NateDawg39]

Originally posted by Phantom Stang
Nate, does your company's policy state that there can be ABSOLUTELY NO TRACES of alcohol, prescription pain killers, over the counter cold and sinus medicines, or any other substances that could impair ones ability to work safely?
If so, does this apply to every single job title in your company?:thinking: Pretty much yes

[Phantom Stang]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
Pretty much yes
So, is everyone who works there a Christian Scientist?:D

[AP Panther Fan]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
When they sign the dotted line they sign off that they won't use drugs and if it is a medical requirement, then I have the responsibility to let them go for safety concern if need be.

The argument could be made that perhaps employees should be fired for not taking their prescribed meds. Lord knows, those folks can be dangerous as well.

Of course if you fired them, they might just come back and shoot everyone in the place.:thinking:

Just thinking out loud....:)

[Phantom Stang]

Originally posted by AP Panther Fan
The argument could be made that perhaps employees should be fired for not taking their prescribed meds. Lord knows, those folks can be dangerous as well.

Of course if you fired them, they might just come back and shoot everyone in the place.:thinking:

Just thinking out loud....:)
I like the way you think.:D

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by NateDawg39
When they sign the dotted line they sign off that they won't use drugs and if it is a medical requirement, then I have the responsibility to let them go for safety concern if need be.



I believe that legally when they sign on the bottom line they are only acknowledging the company policies. I don't think a company can legally require a lifestyle agreement from a employee.

[Pick6]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
I don't think a company can legally require a lifestyle agreement from a employee.

I think the NBA did with Roy Tarpley. The NFL did with Pacman Jones. It can be done.

[BullsFan]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
I believe that legally when they sign on the bottom line they are only acknowledging the company policies. I don't think a company can legally require a lifestyle agreement from a employee.

Someone should tell the school districts in Texas that. We sign a "moral turpitude" clause, although I've never heard of one being used to terminate a teacher.

[sinton66]

Originally posted by ronwx5x
It seems that WalMart is within their rights to fire employees who use medical MJ. I'm not sure it will stop lawsuits, but those who sue are at a disadvantage, according to this attorney.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/LIVING/03/24/michigan.medical.*********.fired/index.html?hpt=T2

"Page not found."

[ronwx5x]

Originally posted by sinton66
"Page not found."

NM. Won't work because the word m*******a is in the link.

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by BullsFan
Someone should tell the school districts in Texas that. We sign a "moral turpitude" clause, although I've never heard of one being used to terminate a teacher.




Texas is a Right-To-Work state so employers get away a lot more than they could in other states. I had dealings with Labor board hearings and court appearances in 3 different states including Texas in my 20+ years in management and never once was the outcome the way I thought it would be. I was fined by the Dept of Labor 40K in 1996 in Sherman Tx. for back wages because I use to ask for volunteers to leave early if the restuarant was slow. If their schedule gives them 8 hours the labor board says you will pay them 8 hours even if they volunteer to go home. He claimed it was an unspoken threat to cut hours if I didn't get volunteers.
I had a kid ride the Workers Comp wagon for 3 years in Colorado Springs for a hurt back even though I personally got pictures of him removing a engine from his car and playing tackle football. If a lawyer gets involved some amazing things can happen.